The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1984-03-19 (Regular) Meeting Agenda- City Council Meeting -Regular March 19, 1984 • • • 0 • - • • • • • 1f_..t..uiLJ~ ~/.fl. 10~ II, ttl, ~ ~..11. K lei_, ;f • 0 0 • I . • • • • ---- f 7:30 P.M. 1. AGENDA FOR THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ENGLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL MARCH 19, 1984 ~ Call to order, invocation by The Reverend George I. Welch, Saint George's Episcopal Church, 3600 South Clarkson Street, pledge of allegiance by Boy Scout Troop 192, and roll call. c~. Minutes. (a) Minutes of the regular meeting of March 5, ~-1984. {Copies enclosed.! ·~· · re-Scheduled Visitors. (Please limit your pre-6 sentation to 10 minutes.) (a) Mr. Corbin Woodward, Master Counselor of the ~~ Englewood Chapter of the Order of DeMolay, ~ and other representatives will be present to ( • ~~ accept a proclamation proclaiming the week \1}1. IJ" !" l) of March 18-24, 1984 as DeMolay Week. (Copies v ~ enclosed.) 3. Other Visitors. (Please limit your presentation to 5 minutes.) 4. Public Hearing. (a) To consider amendments to the Englewood Down- town Redevelopment Plan. (Copies enclosed.) Communications -No Action Recommended. (a) Minutes of the Urban Renewal Authority meeting of February 8, 1984. (Copies enclosed.) (b) Minutes of the Parks and Recreation Commission meeting of February 9, 1984. (Copies enclosed.) • I • - • • • • -- ( • ( Page 2 March 19, 1984 Agenda 5. Communications-No Action Recommended (Continued). (c) Minutes of the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting of February 22, 1984. (Copies enclosed.) (d) Report from Mayor Pro Tem Bradshaw, Council Members Bilo and Neal, and City Manager McCown concerning their attendance at the National League of Cities Conference in Washington, D. c. (Copies enclosed.) 6. Communications -Action Recommended. •"'~~~'~«' (a) Council Communication from the Planning and Zoning Commission concerning the Broadway Planned Development. (Copies enclosed.) ~ Ay...~ <b> G Council Communication from the Urban Renewal Authority concerning a fund transfer to the Urban Renewal Authority for property acqui- sition and a construction project. (Copies enclosed.) ~~i ~(c) ~(d) Council Communication from the Water and Sewer Board concerning •The Broadway• at Cinderella City-utility easement. (Copies enclosed.) Council Communication from the Water and Sewer Board concerning a City Sewer System Analysis for the Community Center. (Copies enclosed.) (e) / ~-(f) Council Communication from the Parks and Recreation Commission concerning a proposed name for the new Englewood Community Center. (Copies enclosed.) Council Communication from the Library Advisory Board concerning the building consultant contract. (Copies enclosed.) 7. City Attorney. Ordinances on Final Reading. (a) Ordinance approving an agreement with Metro- politan Denver Sewage Disposal District No. 1, providing for special connector status for the City of Englewood. (Copies enclosed.) (b) Ordinance approving an agreement with Cherry Hills Fire Protection District providing for mutual/automatic aid for fire protection for both entities. (Copies enclosed.) • -. I • • ( ------, • • • Page 3 March 19, 1984 Agenda 7. City Attorney (Continued). Proclamations. ~(c) Proclamation proclaiming the week of March 18 to 24, 1984 as Poison Prevention Week. (Copies enclosed.) ~~ft~~ (d) Proclamation proclaiming the month of April, ~~ 1984 as Fair Housing Month. (Copies enclosed.) Other Matters. (e) Attorney's Choice. 8. City Manager. (a) Manager's Choice.-~ tq&J~~~ 9. General Discussion. (a) Mayor's Choice. (b) Choice.~~ ~~~(J~· Council Member's 10. Adjournment. r. 91~ ~·. 41 crtn. ~.I'~~WN Manager AM/sb • • I • • • • • • AGENDA ITEM ----PRESENT ED BY ------ '0J._L;b ~ ~ ~ tudd.- (J~ ~~~CfJ. ~ (1J-o ~ lrlr tdh~ (3/WW ~~ ROLL CALL Moved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Hlqdav Neal Vobeida Weist Bllo Bradshaw Otis MOTION: • Abstain I . . • • • AGENDA ITEM -----PRESENTED BY--------- ROLL CALL Moved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Abstain n1gaay ~ Nea__J_ ~ Vob4Uda ~ W~st ......... ....D.ilo _,..- Bradshaw ~ Otis k:_ MOTION: I • • • • ,.. • • • ....... ---- AGENDA ITEM I a._ PRESENTED BY -------- ROLL CALL Moved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Abstain Hlgday -Neal ,...- Vobe1da Wei st -v Bl lo v Bradshaw - Ot is ...-- • I MariON :~ • • • • • - • • ---- AGENDA ITEM JfA-. PRE S ENTED B Y ------- ROLL CALL Moved Seconded A yes N ay Absent Abstain t11Qday Neal I Vobe1da Wei s t I Bi lo I Brad s haw I Ot i s \ '- I • • • • • • - AGENDA ITEM J ' PRESENTED BY -------- ROLL CALL Moved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Abstain Hlgdav Neal Vobeida Weist Rllo Bradshaw Otis MOTION: I • • • • • • • ,_-- AGENDA ITEM ~ PRESENTED BY -------- ROLL CALL Moved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Abstain Hlgday I Neal I Vobeida I ....-Weist I Bi lo I ,-Bradshaw Otis I I MOTION: J I • • • • • • • ------ AGENDA ITEM 4/L--PRESENTED BY ---- Moved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Abstain Higday Neal Vobe;da Weist Rilo Bradshaw Otis MOTION: I . • • • • • • -- AGENDA I TEM 111..-- Hoved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Abstain Hiqelay Neal Vobei d a Weist Bi Jo Bradshaw Otis MOTION: I . • • • • - • • ..... - AGENDA ITEM __ _ PRESENTED BY ----- Moved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Abstain IQCSay Neal Vobe1da Weist Bllo Bradshaw Otis MOTION: I . . • • J • • • ,__ ~--- AG ENDA ITEM __ _ PRESENTED BY ---- ~41./~-qo S . ~ ~ ~ ROLL CALL H d S d d ove econ e Ay~ Nay Absent Abstain Hlgday I v-Neal I Vobeida I Weist I Bllo v Bradshaw \ Otis '\, MCYriON: (U-<-/1 ~ u e A o t ~ ~~ "'-3-zc:;-8 <? oL-.. $,'(){) (lrn . • • I . • - • AGEND A ITEM ~ ---''------- Moved Seconded -H qdav Neal Vobe1da Weist Ri lo -Bradshaw Otis MOTION: ROLL CALL • • • PRESENTED BY ------- Ay~ Nay Absent Abstain I J I r \ I • • • - • • - AGENDA ITEM 0J a_. -0--PRESENTED BY -------- ROLL CALL Hoved s d d econ e A y~ N ay Ab sent Ab sta n RTCiday \ Neal I Vobe1da I y Weist I Bi lo I v Bradshaw I Otis l '-. I • • • • • • -- AGENDA ITEM 6 a. · PRESENTED BY /J)C ~ ROLL CALL Moved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Abstain "\ Hlgday I Neal I Vobe;da I v Weist I Bi lo y Bradshaw I Otis " I . • • • • - • • .... - AGENDA ITEM -----P RESENTED BY -------- ROLL CALL Moved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Abstain HIQday Neal Vobeida Weist Bllo Brad s haw Oti s MOTION: • I • • • • • • • -- AGENDA ITEM ~ b , --=----~-PRESENTED BY l'rl L ~ ROLL CALL Moved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Abstain ~ ~~ 1 Nea..!_ _j_ Vobuda _j_ Weist _j_ ~ _Bilo _j_ ..!!::.. Bradshaw j_ Otis _1 \ MOTION: I • • • • - • • .... -... AGEN DA ITEM PRESENTED BY )() e ~ ROLL CALL Moved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Abstain ' HIQOay I Neal I Vobeida I Wei st I v Bi lo f --v Bradshaw \ Otis " - • I . • • • n • • • PRESENTED BY ~~--------- ROLL CALL Moved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Abstain r-tHgdav Nea r-vobe1da Weist r-v Bllo v Bradshaw Otis MOTION: I • • • • • • .. AGENDA ITEM 6 cz.. P RESENTED BYdi-)c ~) ROLL CALL Moved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Abstain \ Hlgday 1 Neal I Vobejda 7 Weist I y Bllo I y Bradshaw \ Otis \.: " MOTION: I • • • • • • ... - P RESENTED BY f1h (' CMAn.1 ROL L CAL L Moved Seconded A ye" Nay Absent Abstain ~lgday I Neal I Vobe=lda I v Weist 7 ,... · Bi lo I y Bradshaw l Otis ' ' • MOTION: ~~ a_,ujTV ~ ~ 1: ---r -;r~ I ~ ~12+i5 ~ • • ~-~ • • • • AGENDA ITEM ~ PRESENTED BY -------- ROLL CALL Hoved Secon d ed A y~ Nay b A sent A bsta n H!Qday 1 JIII/I( Neal I Vobe1da I Weist I ,.-81 fO I -Bradshaw Otis '--MOTION: • I • • • • • • • AGENDA ITEM ~ PRESENTED BY -------- ROLL CALL Moved Seconded A y~ Nay A bsent Absta n HIQday I v-Neal I Vobe1da I Weist I -Bllo I Bradshaw ~ Otis \ ' MOTION:/' ~J;:!.0 ~ it-t~ I • • • • • - • • AGENDA ITEM ~ PRESENTED BY -------- ROLL CALL A Ab A Moved Seconded ye~ N•y sent bsta n v HIQdav I Neal 7 Vobe1da I Weist Bllo v Bradshaw Otis \ "' M<Jl'ION: I • • .~----~~------------~ • n • • • AGENDA ITEM ~ PRES ENTED B Y -------- RO LL CALL Hoved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Abstain ' Hlgday Neal v Vobe,da v Wei s t I Bllo Brads haw I Otis \ ' MOTION:~ I • • • • - • • • • AGENDA ITEM i_ PRESENTED BY~C....&wl... ~"-~ ~ {'1 {~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~ctaL 1 ~ /U (aCU-L I~~ rtr\... ~ ~._L cY--· ROLL CALL Moved Seconded Abstain _11_1May Neal Vobe1da We i s t Bl l o Bradshaw Ot is MariON: • I . • n r I (( • • • • r' TO: City Council Members FROM: Susan Powers, Director of Community Development DATE: March 15, 1984 SUBJECT: Explanation of Various Downtown Redevelopment Plan Amendment Items On Monday, March 19, 1984, the City Council will have several items on the agenda that relate to the amendment of the Downtown Redevelopment Plan. The purpose of this memo is to explain the relationship between the various Council Communications. Council Communication "A" was previously transmitted to the City Council and was the basis for the scheduling of the Public Hearing on March 19, 1984. The purpose of the Hearing is to consider amendments to the Down- town Redevelopment Plan which include the following: 1. Major changes to the text of the Plan to provide consistency with the current Brady Plan. 2. Listing of property for acquisition by the Urban Renewal Authority including the west side of South Acoma Street, Holthaus pro perty on the east side of South Acoma Street, and the American Office Building (3401 South Bannock). This Plan amendment was sent to the Planning and Zoning Commission for their review for consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, and the Planning Commission reco1m1endation is reflected in Council Communication "B". They are transmitting to the City Council that the Plan amendment as out- lined above i s consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Since the time that Council Communication "A" was transmitted to the City Council, there were several other changes to the Downtown Redevelopment Plan that were reviewed by staff and the Urban Renewal Authority. These changes involve additional properties that are needed to carry out the Plan, including the following: 1. 2. 3. Parking lots south of First Interstate Bank. 3311 South Broadway. Leases within 3315-3386 South Broadway, 3340-3384 South Acoma Street, and 33-95 West Girard Avenue. These amendments to the Downtown Redevelopment Plan are outlined in Council Communication "C". Since this is the first time the City Council has received this request, it must be sent to the Planning Commission for • I • • (( • City Council Members March 15, 1984 Page -2- • • • review and recommendation on consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, prior to City Council action to amend the Downtown Redevelopment Plan. The suggested procedure for the March 19, 1984 Public Hearing is as follows: 1. Open Public Hearing to consider City Council Communication "A". During the Hearing, receive the recommendation from Planning Com- mission as outlined in Council Communication "B". 2. Receive Council Communication "C" and have staff explain amend- ments. 3. Hear testimony on the amendment outlined in Council Communication "A". 4. Transmit the amendment outlined in Council CoDIIIUnication "C" to Planning Commission for review at their meeting on March 20, 1984 . 5. Continue the Public Hearing to March 26, 1984 to consider amend- ments outlined in Council CoDIIIunication "C". gw • I . - (( • • • • ATTACHMENT A C 0 U N C I L C 0 M M U N I C A T I 0 N DATE AGENDA ITEM {QE SUBJECT Amendment of Englewood Down- town Redevelopment Plan Februarv 14 1984 INITIATED BY Endewood Urban Bepeyal Authority ACTION PROPOSED AmMd the Dnyntpwp Redevelopment Plan to reflect a recognition of current market cnnditigns and include add1t1opal properties yb1ch need to hp .1 ,_,. ,. D1 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND. The Englewood Downtown Redevelopment Plan (Urban Renewal Plan) was adopted by City Council on August 23, 1982, and aaended on December 22, 1982. This Plan was com- prised of public and private development elements which reflected market conditions at that tiae. Recent econoaic analyses have indicated the necessity of amending the Plan's redevelopment scenario to take advantage of current market opportunities. Also, additional properties have been identified which the Authority will have to acquire to implement the Plan. Since this is a substantial a.end.ent, it will be necessary for a review of the Plan to be conducted by the Planning and Zoning co .. isaion to deteraine if the Plan is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan. Therefore, the Plan should be referred to the Planning co .. ission prior to City Council holding a public hearing on the amendments. RECOMMENDATION: The following is recommended to City Council: 1. Refer the amended Downtown Redevelopment Plan to the Planning and Zoning Com- mission for review of Comprehensive Plan conformance; 2. Receive the Planning Commission comments, and conduct a public hearing in accordance with the Colorado Urban Renewal Statutes CRS 1973 (as amended) 31-25-107(3); and 3. Amend the Englewood Downtown Redevelopment Plan in accordance with the attached Addendum 14 • • I • - ,, ' 2 3 9 10 14 16 16a 17 18 19 20 20 -21 (( 21 • • • ,. • ADDI!:NDUH 14 Urban Renewal Plan Amendments • Anlendacnt Delete the lnRt ·hnlf of the lnRt RC'ntc,nN' In t·h,. r 1 r s l' paragraph, "and 18 the basis parties." Delete the third sentence of the third paragraph, "This would not be ••• Plan." Delete objectives 8, 9 and 15 Delete objective 20 Firat sentence, third paragraph: Delete "past six months"; replace with "recant past." l•'lrst paragraph: Change project cost cstiwutcs to $100 million for entire project, $15 aillion for public im- provements, and $85 million for private improvements. Second paragraph: Delete the third and fourth sentences "These figure• •• •lledevelopaant Area" and the last sentence "For instance ••• project." Replace map with new map. Change "Suuaary of Public Iaproveam~t Projects" to the following: 1) Little Dry Creek Flood Control 2) Civic Center Boulevard 3) Broadway Corridor Iaproveaenta 4) Utilities Improvement and llelocation Totnl $12,000,000 $ 2,000,000 $ 300,000 $ 1,000,000 $15,)00,000 Third paragraph: Delete the third word "guidelines". In- sert "the conatruction of lakea" after "iaprov•enta include" in the second sentence. Replace the laat nwaber on the page "$14,000,000" with "$12,000,000." Delete all of the "2. Pedestrian Mall" description. Re- place with new description of the Civic Center Boulevard. Change the cost of 1\rondwny Corridor_T•provetacntH fro•• "$865,000" to "$300,000," Delete all of tha "4. Skarritt Park lledevalopi.ant" description. llenUIDber "Utility lfrovaaanta and llelocation" to 14, Chanae the eatiaate coat to $1,000,000 . • I • • - ' 21 (Cont.) 22 23 24 25 -29 30 -35a 36 -37 39b 41 42 4J 45 48 48 49 • • • • -?.- llndt•r U_t _1_1_1_!.J .. T.'!'f..!."Y.".III.l'!l_t.!!_, fourth H<'nl·•·eu;.•, •·lo:enl'.<' 1·h·· laat word "ull11' to waterway and bouJt.vurd. Uelcte the remainder of the page, fro• "The following is " hn•ukdown ••• "to "out of the project." Delete the whole page. Delete the whole page. Oelete the ~hole pnr.r.. Delete the whole section on ."!'.!:.i~n_t_e __ P_r2_j_t;c_t~ ami ·J nst•rt the new deacription and two -pa of the proposed proj ecta. Delete the whole section on Site Plannina. Delete the sectf.on on T_r_n_n_!l~_o_r_t_n_t_to_n _1'_1 _:a _n!l _1_n_& <'X<"t•pt tht• lu"t pMCaKrapb on l'aKe :J7, und replace wltb tbl.! 11<-'W de- scription of the proposed tranaportation system. Hake additions to the "Property to be Acquired" list. First paraaraph, second sentence: Delete "prepared and presented to the" and replace with "used by". Also delete "for their use" in that sentence. Fourth sentence: Delete "downtown zone district" nnd replace with _"zonina." Delete the last sentence in the first paragraph: "The develop•ent ••• ti•e to tbe." Delete the second and third paraarapha on the paae. Delete the whole paae. CbanKC "I>" t;o "O". Chanae "F" to "E". Delete the aection and replace with the new section. Delete the laat three sentences of the aecond paragraph, "In consideration ••• conatructed in two phuea:" and replace with three new sentenccH. Third pa•agraph, firat aontence: delete "eati-ted to be $10,000,000," o.leta the third aentence, ''The dee ian phas e ••• by January, 1983." Fourth paraaraph, firat aentence: delete "are to be con- atructed" and "end new conatruction". Chenae 11 co•pl!•ent" to "co•pl.!•ent". Delete the firat paraaraph end replace with a new aentence "Thue iaprov-.nta. , , " • I • - 49 50 51 51 -52 53 -60 (( • • • • -·1- Second paragraph. last sentence tn pan•ntl,·,;l ,;: ll<•pl;H'l' "Table I" with ~'Schedule II" and insert "property" after '"su11111ary of." Add the following to the end of the first paragraph: "(Refer to Schedule C for a su-.ry of sales tax incre- ment projections)". Third paragraph. second sentence: Delete "as demonstrated f.n Tahlc TlT. 11 Delete this entire paragraph. fr0111 "Tahll'! JTI of this section" ••• to " ••• Downtown Develop111ent Authority." Replace with a new paragraph referring to Schedule D. Delete all the Tables on these pages and replace with Schedules A -D. • I . - ADDITIONAL PROPERTIES TO BE ACQUIRED Address 3401 South Bannock Street 3415 South Acoma Street 3427 South Acoma Street 3447-93 South Acoma STreet 3448-90 South Acoma Street f i (( • • • • • P. P. I. NUMBER 1971-34-3-19-022 1971-34-3-19-028 1971-34-3-18-016 1971-34-3-18-017 1971-34-3-18-018 1971-34-3-18-019 1971-34-3-18-020 1971-34-3-18-021 1971-34-3-18-022 1971-34-3-18-023 1971-34-3-17-022 I • • ( • • • ATTACHMENT B C 0 U N C I L C 0 M M U N I C A T I 0 N DATE AGENDA I TEH SUBJECT Determination of the Complianc of Downtown Redevelopment Plan Amendment to lth<> linD· ~n,.,d •< ·~ 1'1 "n March 13 1984 INITIATED BY Englewood Planning and Zoning Commission ACTION PROPOSED Accept the Findings of the Planning and Zoning Commission that the proposed amendment to the Englewood Downtown Redevelopment Plan conforms to the En2lewood ComnrehenRive Plan INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND: Statutes of the Urban Renewal Authority of the State of Colorado require that all proposed Urban Renewal Plans and amendments to such plans be reviewed by the Planning Commission of the municipality for which the Plan and/or amendments are proposed prior to adoption by City Council. This review is for the purpose of determining compliance of the plans and/or amendments with the community's Comprehensive Plan. The Englewood Planning and Zoning Commission previously examined the Englewood Downtown Redevelopment Plan and determined that the aforementioned requirement of compliance was met. On February 22, 1984, the Commission reviewed a proposed amendment to the Downtown Redevelopment Plan and determined that this amendment was also in compliance with the City Comprehensive Plan. RECOMMENDATION: The Englewood Planning and Zoning Commission recommends that City Council formally accept its findings that the proposed amendment to the Englewood Downtown Redevelop- ment Plan is in compliance with the Englewood Comprehensive Plan. I • • ·In ' • Resolution No. 1 Series of 1984 • • • CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO Planning and Zoning Commission A RESOLUTION OF TilE ENGLEWOOD Pl.ANNtNC AND ZONTNC COHMTSSJON lH:CAROtNC CONSISTENCY OF THE AMENDED DOWN'i'OWN REDEVELOPMENT PLAN WITH 1111!: GENERAL PLAN OF THE CITY OF EWGLEWOOD. WHEREAS, a Downtown Redevelopment Plan has been prepared by the Englewood Urban Renewal Authority; and WHEREAS, the Uowntown Redevelopment Plan was amended by the Urban Renewal Authority on February 8, 1984; and WHEREAS, the City Council has submitted the Downtown Redevelopment Plan to the Englewood Planning and Zoning Commission for review and recoJnmenda- tions as to its conformity with the General Plan for the development of the municipality as a whole in accordance with Section 31-25-107(2) C.R.S. 1973, as amended; and WHEREAS, a review has been conducted by the Englewood Planning and Zoning Commission. NOW, T II EHEFO!tl!:, lll!: 1'1' ltl!:SOLVEU by thu l'lanning and Z.onln~,; Cum- mission of the City of Englewood, Colorado: ATTE ST : Section 1: That the Downtown Redevelopment Plan, as amended, has been determined to be in conformity with the General Plan of de- ve lopment f o r t he City of longlewood. ADOPTED AND APPROVED THIS --~22~n~d~--day of --~F~e~b~rua~ry~-------• 1984. • I • • • • • • ATTACHMENT C C 0 U N C I L C 0 M M U N I C A T I 0 N DATE March 13, 1984 AGE NDA ITEM SUBJECT Amendment of the Downtown Re- development Plan by the Addition of Certain Proo erties a n d Leasehold A~reements. INITIATED BY Epalewpgd U r ban Bep ewa l Autho r i t y ACTION PROPOSED_""'Am~e~n~d~t~h~e"-'E~n:!.g~l~e:!w~o~o~d:.....!D~o!!wn~t:.!:o~wn~..!:R~e~dc::ec!vc::e~l!:!o.l!p.!!!m.=en!!.!:;t....!..P:.la~n~b~yL.l:.i!::s~t:..:i!:.!n.!.lgL- additipnal prp p e r ties fpr ac qu i sit i on . INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND: As preliminary planning for the Civic Center Boulevard and Little Dry Creek improve- ments has progressed, properties have been id~ntified which will be necessary to be used in the construction of these public improvements. An amendment to the Downtown Redevelopment Plan submitted to Council for consider ation at a March 19, 1984 public hearing lists additional required properties identified by project e n gineers as well as changes to the text of the Plan . Since preparation of the amendment and submittal to Council for consideration, three additional parcels have been identified as necessary for boulevard right-of- way. These parcels comprise a parking lot immediately south of an office building at 3385 South Bannock in the First Interstate Bank block and adjacent to the cor- ner of South Bannock Street and West Girard Avenue . Also, a small portion (a south- east corner) of the parking lot west of and adjacent to the parking lot previously described is necessary for boulevard construction. These parking lots are identified in Amendment #5 which is attached to this communication. Pursuant to Section 1.2 of the Redevelopment Agreement between the Englewood Urban Renewal Authority and Brady Development Corporation and S. Bud Brady, dated November 2, 1983, Brady Corporation has requested that certain leasehold agreements and a property be included in the Redevelopment Plan in order for the Urban Renewal Au- thority to assist Brady in the acquisition of these properties. The schedule for the construction of the new King Soopers Store and Retail Plaza makes immediate control of these properties by Brady imperative. Documentation required by Section 1.2 of the Agreement will be submitted by Brady to indicate that good faith negotiations have taken place between the lessees/owners and Brady, and that these negotiations have failed. These documents will be avail- able for inspection by City Council • I • • • • • • RECOMMENDATION: In order to substantially amend the Downtown Redevelopment Plan (Urban Renewal Plan), the Planning and Zoning Commission must determine that an amendment is in compliance with th e Englewood Comprehensive Plan. Therefore, staff recommends that the two amendments described above be referred to the Planning Commission for their deter- mination of compliance. To accommodate the Commission's review, staff recommends that the Council Public Hearing of March 19, 1984 be continued to March 26 , 1984. At this latter date, it i .s anticipated that the Commissio n's findings will be available for Council consideration. Upon a finding by the Planning and Zoning Commission that t he proposed amendments are in compliance with the Englewood Comprehensive Plan, staff recomm ends that Council: 1) Adopt Plan Amendment #5, which lists the parking lots to be used for Civic Center Boulevard rights-of-way. 2) a) Review the documentation submitted by Brady Development Corporation as a basis f or listing the requested properties and leasehold agreements. b) Determine if the documentation is sufficient to meet the requirements of Section 1 .2 of the Redevelopment. If so, adopt Plan Amendment #6. SUGGESTED ACTION: MOVED BY SECOND YES NO ABSENT I • • ( • AMENDMENT li S Property Parking Lot -Northwest corner of South Bannock/West Girard Southern end of Parking Lot -Northeast corner of South Cherokee/West Girard AMENDMENT 116 Address 3311 South Broadway Leases within the following properties: 3315-3386 South Broadway and 3340-3384 South Acoma Street, and 33-95 West Girard Avenue • • • • P. P. I. Number 1971-34-3-19-28 1971-34-3-19-24 1971-34-3-00-14 P. P. I. Number 1971-34-3-16-001 1971-34-3-00-022 1971-34-3-16-002 1971-34-3-16-020 I • ~c.r.&.aDJa.P.C. _...L_ .. n.. L. WA&.&Ma .. """- ~P.~.P£. -L-a.&ft L ....._, P£. .a..-a.a..a.y . .-..p£. .-........... , f-.-rP.--.P£. ...._L.._,.._P£. ....... _., .......... ~., _.__ .... L. ... ..n -L-1' ...... -.. -----... .. -..- ,_...-. ••• £. -L- • • • • Gms, KRAMER, GBIIIBBAW Be HARRING A LAW P AIITHI!IIIIIIIP DIGLUDIHG PROPB8810NAL OOIU'OIIATIONS SUITB- O!lll UNIT1ID -CIDITBII 1700 LINOOLN II'I1UIBT DBHVllll, G0L0aAD0- TBUIPIIONII (_.) _......., ~----· March 7, 1984 Englewood Urban Renewal Authority 3400 South Elati Englewood, Colorado 80110 1'110111N11' '"*""'" ...,.. "' ..... ~ .. _.. __ D&V.C.~ ....... P ......... ,._YL-OODII -L--... nwwa.a&&. ..... _ .. _ _.__ _..,.. ................... ...__ ... -L--L--. .. .--. .. _ '"*~• L.a.uuauuan MAft A MIWI&AU OU•1'WL. UllfNIWY .. __ ·~~ .. uu. ...-&.a.-..nuY ........... QUTQIO ,_.. ... _ wau.u!P~..nL ~ ....... -.... ..n"(,J.-· .,...,. ............... . -.. ..... -L--uv.f,J,I'UIIIJI&L ....... ~. Re: Amendment to Englewood Downtown Redevelopment Plan Gentlemen: This firm represents s. Bud Brady and Brady Development Corporation (collectively, "Brady") in connection with the Urban Renewal Plan ("Plan"). We have been asked by Susan Powers, the executive director of the Englewood Urban Renewal Authority ("Authority") , to provide this letter in order to request an amendment to the Plan. Pursuant to the Agreement for Disposition and Redevelopment dated November 2, 1983 between the Authority and Brady, Brady hereby formally requests that (i) the Plan be amended to include for acquisition those properties and property interests described in Exhibits "A" and "B" attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference and, (ii) that following amendment of the Plan the Authority recommend to the City of Englewood that such properties be designated for acquisition by the Authority. Brady's proposed amendment to the Plan requires expedited action by the Authority due to the time constraints in the Agreement with respect to the commencement of construction on the properties described in Exhibits "A" and "B". Therefore, to expedite the amendment process, we are submitting this letter with the understanding that: (i) negotiations for the acquisition of the properties are continuing and it is anticipated that acquisition of all the properties by the Authority will not be required; and (ii) all documentation required by the Agreement for the Plan to be amended for this purpose shall be provided to the Authority as soon as it is available. RBP/lkr Enclosures 8500.001 Very truly yours, ~"NS, ~~R,J!19MSHJ\W' ~s1/5 ·~~ Robert B. Paysi.~r \1 HARRING I • • • • • -· . . . ..... ·····-· . . .... ................... rt .............. .. -... -· ... hn ..... • u. • u•., ....._ ••......., • ...... ._ .............. & .. ....,_ 11111 ._ .... &II .C _ ... •U.. ............. , ........... II •\a..... . -............ _.. ..... ..._.,_., .................. ................ u .... ..... All '-'• -,.ns..aa&r '-'"-" .. leU-• · 7 .......... &17.1 ·-............................. --.. ''-iiU• • u•., ........... •·,... ........... _._ .. .. ..... .... .. ..... ..,_ ,,_,., ....... ..._.. ..... , .... ... .................. , ................ 111M.--......................... .._ .. -. . . .._., ...... ._ ••• *-' , ...... as •-• ........................ _ .... ,_ ....................... . -. .... .a..· ........ u.. ... u ·-..... -. ---. ........ :~ ................. ~:~; ~f·! '· also,khown ~s street a~d 'number 3311 South Broadway, Englewood, Colorado • .,~: I • • - 0 • • • EXHIBIT "B" Tenant Addreaa Almoat New Shoppe 59 Weat Girard Central Office 3325 South Broadway Supply Firat Church of 3378 South Acoma Chriat, Scientiat Ali Bab'a 3370 South Acoma Reataurant Downtown Hobbie• 3333 South Broadway (name changed to Mile-Hi Hobbiea, Inc.) Sir Speedy 55 Weat Girard Newton'• Hair 65 Weat Girard Styling Iaaac'a Copy Shop 95 Weat Girard Nathan'• Phyaical 3315 South Broadway Whimaical Philip Haag and 3384 South Acoma Mike Fitzpatrick Dr. Sahl Schor 75 Weat Girard Man' a World 3365 South Broadway Super Yarn Mart 3340 South Acoma Aagaar Ranikeah 3341 South Broadway Sandy and Jack 3350 South Acoma Donahue Naylor'• Cuatame 3386 South Broadway Wind Repair C ' H Reproduction• 3337 South Broadway Landmark Interiora, 37 Weat Girard Inc. Ted'a Cuatom Tailor a 33 Weat Girard Leaae Dated March 29, 1983 June 3, 1981 Nov-.ber 20, 1981 November 1, 1975 March 11, 1982 Moveaber 18, 1976 Deceaber 21, 1978 Septe.ber 28, 1982 Dece.ber 8, 1182 October 31, 1t83 June 23, liU April 11', ltll JUDe 26, 1111 Nov-.ber 3, ltll October 6, 1983 February 18, 1182 June 8, 1983 Auvuat 12, 1982 April 25, 1113 The legal deacription of the property upon which theae leaaea attach ia •• followa: • I • • • • •' • EXHIBIT "B" & bact ef lad hS., .. rt of J.et 12, lleck I, -.waft' AIIDITIO.. l'OC'ZIIU VIII llle laot l/2 of,.., .. .u., ~·aas.a t .. t ,.n of .. w .. , 12 • t ... V.et, _. tert of tile ~ of lecUoa J4, r..eu, • Iouth, Ina• II V.et of tM 6tla t.ll •• O.Crn..t .. foU...a ..._._~ o .... t 117.7 fMt ... &Ia _. H.O IMt Veot of, ... -.n .... t conu ef ,... of •U tecu.-J4, llldcii,.IM a., .. Satereectloa ofllle Iouth "-., n.,. --cr ...... ,, ...... lena ........ , .. 1M ... , "-of ... ,, ....... ,.1 . tlloaco leutla a-laet atoaa .. w .. , ,._of loutla lnl4wr. o •utuco or H.lS '"' &e t ... ftDI NUT or ucu.uca tlloaco loutla 1,.60. v..c. a •uca.co of 211.0 l•t to a ,.Ia& oa llle laot la.. of ... ,, ..... ltr•ta Clloace leutla rl' laot a1oaa .. u laot 1-. of leutla ..._ ltreet • a "•taco of S7S.IS f•t to~-ler&la 1Sao of Veot cu ... • .,....., tlloaco lertll ar•o• laot aleq •U lenla liae of V.at Guar• ....... a diataaco • ' of US. S fHt to t .. lout .... coner of a Inc& of bM ••ocriW Sa look lt4t a tqo 121. ua..-. Couatr record• a "-co lertll rl' laiC a1-. t .. V.at 1a.. of •U tract of '-'• a "etaaco of 106 f•t to tbe ler£-.t coner of •U tract of liMa r • &lance lertll It 40' laet al ... t .. •nil U.. of •U tract of 1 ...... a1eq • Uao ,.rallal to t .. lertla Uao of Veet Girar• &Yauo, a •tecaco of t2.S f•t to , .. Voet U•• of Iouth lr....,.,; tlloaco ler&la fl' laoc at-. tM Veet 1a.. of leutla ar..._,, • •utuu of J71.1S f•t to t .. 1'IUI POUlt or IIGtaDC. c:o.&r or ua,. ... . ltoco of C.lor ... . -2- • I . . - • • • REGULAR MEETING: • • • COUNCIL CHAMBERS City of Englewood, Colorado March 5, 1984 1 A The City Council of the City of Englewood, Arapahoe County, Colorado, met in regular session on March 5, 1984, at 7:30 p.m. Mayor Otis, presiding, called the meeting to order. The invocation was given by Reverend Jim Hoehn, Seventh Day Adventist Church, 2675 South Downing Street. The pledge of allegiance was given by Boy Scout Troop 192. Mayor Otis asked for roll call. Upon a call of the roll, the following were present: r Council Members Higday, Vobejda, Weist, Bradshaw, Otis. Absent: Council Members Neal, Silo. The Mayor declared a quorum present • • • • • • • • Also present were: Acting City Manager Vargas City Attorney DeWitt Director of WWTP Owen Deputy City Clerk Owen • • • • • • • COUNCIL MEMBER WEIST MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF FEBRUARY 21, 1984. Council Member Bradshaw seconded the mo- tion. Upon a call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows: Ayes: Council Members Vobejda, Weist, Bradshaw, Otis. Nays: None. Abstain: Council Member Higday. Absent: Council Members Neal, Silo. The Mayor declared the motion carried. • • • • • • • • I • • • March 5, 1984 Page 2 • • • There were no pre-scheduled visitors. * * * * * * * There were no other visitors at this time. * * * * * * * "Communications -No Action Recommended" on the agenda were: (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) Minutes of the Housing Authority meeting of December 7,1983. Minutes of the Water and Sewer Board meeting of January 4, 1984. Minutes of the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting of February 7, 1984. Minutes of the Downtown Development Authority meeting of February 8, 1984. Memorandum from the Director of Community Development concerning a trip to Los Angeles. COUNCIL MEMBER BRADSHAW MOVED TO ACCEPT "COMMUNICATIONS -NO ACTION RECOMMENDED", AGENDA ITEMS S(A) -S(E). Council Member Weist seconded the motion. Upon a call of the roll, the vote resulted as fol-lows: Ayes: Nays: Absent: Council Members Higday, Vobejda, Weist, Bradshaw, Otis. None. Council Members Neal, Silo. The Mayor declared the motion carried. * * * * * * * Acting City Manager Vargas presented a Council Communication from the Planning and Zon i ng Commission concerning proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance relating to 22.4-11, 22.4-13, 22.4C and 22.7. Mr. Vargas stated with this transmittal, the Commission has completed its review of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance • • I • • ( • March 5, 1984 Page 3 • • .. COUNCIL MEMBER BRADSHAW MOVED TO RECEIVE THE RECOMMENDATIONS AND DIRECT THE CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE THE APPROPRIATE ORDINANCE. Council Member Vobejda seconded the motion. Upon a call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows: Ayes: Nays: Absent: Council Members Higday, Vobejda, Weist, Bradshaw, Otis. None. Council Members Neal, Bilo. The Mayor declared the motion carried. * * * * * * * Acting City Manager Vargas presented a Council Communication from the Water and Sewer Board concerning an investigative study of the joint use of Big Dry Creek. Mr. Vargas stated the cost of this study was estimated not to exceed $10,000 with Englewood's 10% share being $1,000. COUNCIL MEMBER VOBEJDA MOVED TO APPROVE PARTICIPATION IN THE MEURER & ASSOCIATES STUDY ON THE BIG DRY CREEK INTERCEPTOR. Council Member Higday seconded the motion. Upon a call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows: Ayes: Nays: Absent: Council Members Higday, Vobejda, Weist, Bradshaw, Otis. None. Council Members Neal, Bilo. The Mayor declared the motion carried. * * * * * * * Acting City Manager Vargas presented a Council Communication from the Water and Sewer Board concerning Water Distribution Network Analysis. COUNCIL MEMBER HIGDAY MOVED TO APPROVE THE WATER DISTRIBUTION NETWORK ANALYSIS BY CAMP, DRESSER & MCKEE WITH AN UPPER LIMIT OF $10,091. Council Member Weist seconded the motion. Upon a call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows: Ayes: Council Members Higday, Vobejda, Weist, Bradshaw, Otis • • I • • March 5, 1984 Page 4 Nays: Absent: • • • None. Council Members Neal, Bilo. The Mayor declared the motion carried. * * * * * * * Acting City Manager Vargas presented a Council Communication from the Water and Sewer Board concerning the City Ditch License Agree- ment with the City of Littleton. COUNCIL BETWEEN THE CITY THE CITY DITCH. of the roll, the Ayes: Nays: Absent: MEMBER HIGDAY MOVED TO APPROVE THE LICENSE AGREEMENTS OF ENGLEWOOD AND THE CITY OF LITTLETON FOR A PORTION OF Council Member Vobejda seconded the motion. Upon a call vote resulted as follows: Council Members Higday, Vobejda, Weist, Bradshaw, Otis. None. Council Members Neal, Bilo. The Mayor declared the motion carried. * * * * * * * Acting City Manager Vargas presented a Council Communication from the Water and Sewer Board concerning updating the Sewer Master Plan. COUNCIL MEMBER VOBEJDA MOVED TO APPROVE THE UPDATE FOR THE CITY'S SEWER MASTER PLAN TO BE COMPLETED BY BLACK & VEATCH ENGINEERS FOR AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $5,500. Council Member Weist seconded the me- ion. Upon a call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows: Ayes: Nays: Absent: Council Members Higday, Vobejda, Weist, Bradshaw, Otis. None. Council Members Neal, Bilo. The Mayor declared the motion carried. * * * * * * * BY AUTHORITY • I • - ( ( • March 5, 1984 Page 5 ORDINANCE NO. 9 SERIES OF 1984 • • • COUNCIL BILL NO. 8 INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER BILO AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ARTICLE I, CHAPTER 6, SECTION 9, OF THE ENGLEWOOD MUNICIPAL CODE 1969, AS AMENDED, PROVIDING FOR QUARTERLY REPORTS, RATHER THAN MONTHLY REPORTS, FROM MUNICIPAL COURT TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF ALL NOTICES AND CITATIONS ISSUED, AMONG OTHER INFORMATION. COUNCIL MEMBER BRADSHAW MOVED TO PASS COUNCIL BILL NO. 8, SERIES OF 1984, ON FINAL READING. Council Member Weist seconded the motion. Upon a call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows: Ayes: Nays: Absent: Council Members Higday, Vobejda, Weist, Bradshaw, Otis. None. Council Members Neal, Bilo. The Mayor declared the motion carried. ORDINANCE NO. 10 SERIES OF 1984 * * * * BY AUTHORITY * * * COUNCIL BILL NO. 9 I NTRODUCED BY COUNCI L MEMBER BRADSHAW AN ORDINANCE APPROV I NG AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ENG LEW OOD, COLORADO, AND THE CE NTRAL COLORAD O LIBRARY SYSTEM REGARDING RE CI PR OC AL BORROW I NG PROGRAM. COU NCI L MEMBER BRADSHAW MOV ED TO PAS S COU NCIL BILL NO. 9, S ER I ES OF 19 84, ON FINAL READING . Council Member Weist seconded the motion . Upon a call of the roll , the vote resulted as follo ws: Ayes: Nays: Absent: Council Members Higday , Vobejda, Weist , Bradshaw, Otis. None. Council Members Neal, Bilo. The Mayor declared the motion carried . * * * * * * * • I • • • March 5, 1984 Page 6 ORDINANCE NO. SERIES OF 1984 • • • BY AUTHORITY A BILL FOR COUNCIL BILL NO. 11 INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER BRADSHAW AN ORDINANCE APPROVING AN AGREEMENT WITH THE METROPOLITAN DENVER SEWAGE DISPOSAL DISTRICT NO. 1 PROVIDING FOR SPECIAL CONNECTOR STATUS FOR THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD. City Attorney DeWitt confirmed that Council presently had Ad- dendum B before them because it was inadvertently left out of their packets. City Attorney DeWitt noted when the agreement was originally presented to the City it would have required the City to terminate the use of its sewer treatment plant. Mr. DeWitt stated Section 806 of the agreement before them intended to repeal the sections in the previous agreement which prohibited the City from maintaining its extensive sewer treatment system. Mr. DeWitt noted the term of the agreement was 45 years. COUNCIL MEMBER BRADSHAW MOVED TO PASS COUNCIL BILL NO. 11, SERIES OF 1984, ON FIRST READING. Council Member Vobejda seconded the motion. Upon a call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows: Ayes: Nays: Absent: Council Members Higday, Vobejda, Weist, Bradshaw, Otis. None. Council Members Neal, Bilo. The Mayor declared the motion carried. • • • • • • • City Attorney DeWitt transmitted a report concerning the Odd Fellows vs City of Englewood lawsuit. Mr. DeWitt stated the matter was set for hearing on March 12, 1984. • • • • • • • City Attorney DeWitt transmitted a report concerning the Water Tower (Rich, et al) vs. City of Englewood lawsuit . Mr. DeWitt stated the hearing date for this matter was set for April 13, 1984 before the Su-preme Court. • I • • - ( • March 5, 1984 Page 7 ORDINANCE NO. SERIES OF 1984 * * • • • * * * BY AUTHORITY A BILL FOR * * COUNCIL BILL NO. 12 INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WEIST AN ORDINANCE APPROVING AN EASEMENT TO SOUTH SUBURBAN METROPOLITAN RECREA- TIONAL AND PARK DISTRICT, A QUASI-MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, FOR THE COLORADO DEMONSTRATION TRAIL. COUNCIL MEMBER WEIST MOVED TO PASS COUNCIL BILL NO. 12, SERIES OF 1983, ON FIRST READING. Council Member Bradshaw seconded the motion. Upon a call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows: Ayes: Nays: Absent: Council Members Higday, Vobejda, Weist, Bradshaw, Otis. None. Council Members Neal, Bilo. The Mayor declared the motion carried. * * * * * * * City Attorney DeWitt notified Council of a suit filed against the City earlier in the day by Scott Clifford Taylor alleging false ar- rest. Hr. DeWitt asked authorization to defend the City in the suit. COUNCIL MEMBER BRADSHAW MOVED TO ALLOW THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OF- FICE TO DEFEND THE CITY IN THE MATTER OF SCOTT CLIFFORD TAYLOR VS. CITY OF ENGLEWOOD. Council Member Higday seconded the motion. Upon a call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows: Ayes: Nays: Absent: Council Members Higday, Vobejda, Weist, Bradshaw, Otis. None. Council Members Neal, Bilo. The Mayor declared the motion carried. * * * * * * * • I • - • March 5, 1984 Page 8 • • • City Attorney DeWitt notified the Council of another suit filed against the City by Frank Barron, an employee of the City, regarding a polygraph exam. Mr. DeWitt asked for permission to defend the City in this matter. COUNCIL MEMBER HIGDAY MOVED TO AUTHORIZE THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE TO DEFEND THE CITY IN THE MATTER OF FRANK BARRON VS THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD. Council Member Vobejda seconded the motion. Upon a call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows: Ayes: Nays: Absent: Council Members Higday, Vobejda, Weist, Bradshaw, Otis. None. Council Members Neal, Bilo. The Mayor declared the motion carried. • • • • • • • Director of Wastewater Treatment Owen presented a Counc il Com- munication concerning the award of purchase of aeration equ i pment for 1984 expansion of the old Englewood plant. Director Owen stated the low bidder was Philadelph ia Mixers in the amount of $83,147 which includes use tax. COUNCIL MEMBER HIGDAY MOVED TO APPROVE THE PURCHASE OF AERATION EQUIPMENT TO PHILADELPHIA MIXERS FOR $83,147. Council Member Vobe jda seconded the motion. Upon a call of the roll, the vote resulted as fol-lows: Ayes: Nays: Absent: Council Members Higday, Vobejda, Weist, Bradshaw, Otis. None. Council Members Neal, Bilo. The Mayor declared the motion carried. • • • • • • • Director Owen also presented a Council Communication concerning the award of purchase of various pumps for the aforementioned expansion project. Director Owen stated two low bids were received as a result of the different types of pumps required, and he recommended splitting the bid to realize the cost savings. • I • • - r • March 5, 1984 Page 9 •' • • • COUNCIL MEMBER WEIST MOVED TO AWARD THE BID FOR TWO RETURN SLUDGE PUMPS TO WORTHINGTON FOR $19,479 WHICH INCLUDED USE TAX; AND TO AWARD THE BID FOR FOUR WASTE SLUDGE PUMPS AND ONE SUPERNATANT PUMP TO ALLIS-CHALMERS FOR $21,523 WHICH INCLUDED USE TAX. Council Member Vobejda seconded the motion. Upon a call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows: Ayes: Nays: Absent: Council Members Higday, Vobejda, Weist, Bradshaw, Otis. None. Council Members Neal, Bilo. The Mayor declared the motion carried. * * * * * * * The Council concurred that the City Attorney's office prepare a proclamation for National Pray Day, 1984. * * * * * * * The Council concurred that the City Attorney's office prepare a proclamation for Fair Housing Month, April, 1984. * * * * * * * Mayor Otis noted Council Members Neal and Bilo were absent be- cause they were attending the National League of Cit ies Conference. * * * * * * * No further business was discussed. COUNCIL MEMBER HIGDAY MOVED TO ADJOURN THE MEETING. Mayor Otis adjourned the meeting at 8:08 p.m. without a vote. • I • • • • • - P R 0 C L A M A T I 0 N WHEREAS, the Order of DeMolay i s a character bulld 'ng organization of young men from thirteen to tw enty-on e y e ars of age who are seeking to prepare themselves to bec ome better citizens and leaders for tomorrow by deve loping those tr a 1ts of character which have strengthe ned good men in all ages; and WHEREAS, the Order of DeMolay, found ed an d org a n ized mo r e than sixty-four ye ar s ago by Frank s . Land, prov1des prope r tra ini ng and guidance for these young men through programs of athletic competition , social activity, community service and charitable projects; and WHEREAS , a DeMolay obligates himself o n the Holy Bible to to be a bet ter son and man; to honor his paren t s; to honor and prot e ct all wom a n h ood; to love and serve God , his country , and fellow men ; to up h old public schools; to slander no one ; and to exercise tol erance in opinions of others; fJOW , 'riiEilP.Jo'OHE , I , I':UGI·:NJ; L . O'l'IS , Mayor o( Ll w CiLy ol Engle woo d , Colorado, do hereby proclaim the week of March 18 through March 24, 1984 as DeMOLAY WEEK i n the City of Englewood and let it be known thaL the citizens of our City commend these youths for their endeavors in reach ing and maintaining the high go al s they have set for themselves. GI VEN under my hand and seal this 19th day of Marc h , 1984. I • • • • • • - P R 0 C L A M A T I 0 N WHEREAS, the Order of DeMolay is a character building organization of young men from thirteen to twenty-one yeurs of age who are seeking to prepare themselves to become better citizens and leaders for tomorrow by developing those traits of character which have strengthened good men in al l ages; and WHEREAS, the Order of DeMoluy, founded and org a niz e d more than sixty -four y ears ago by Frank s. Land, provides proper tra ining and guidance for these young men through progr ams of athletic competition , social activity , commun ity service and charitable projects ; and WHEREAS , a DeMolay obligates him self on th e Holy Bible to to be a better son and man; to honor hi s parents; to h onor and protect all womanhood; to love and serve God , his country , and fe low men ; to uphold public schools; to slander no one ; and to exercise tolerance in opinions of othe rs; tlOW , 'rJIEI~P.FOHJ':, I , IWGI ·; 1: L . O'l'JS , Mayor o[ Llw C1Ly ol Engl ewood , Colorado, do h er eby proclaim the week of March 18 chrough Marc h 24, 1984 as DeMOLA'i WEEK 1n the City of En glewood und let it be known Lhat the citizens of o r C t y comme nd these youths for the r endeavors 1n reac hin g and rna nta 'ning the high goals they have set for themselves . GIVEN under my hand and seal this 19th day of March , 1984. _£~.#P _ _L£~~ --Eu~n o L . Otis , Ma yor I • • - • • • • • March 19, 1984 INTRODUCTION TO PUBLIC HEARING BY MAYOR OTIS The purpose of this hearing is to consider an amendment to the Downtown Redevelopment Plan. The amendment consists of a major change to the text of the Plan that resulted from a change in the developer's proposal for Downtown Englewood. This change will be outlined in more detail by Susan Powers, Director of Urban Renewal Authority. The other change is that the Urban Renewal Authority is recommending that additional properties be listed in the Plan for acquisition by the Authority. The only properties we will be considering tonight are the following: 3401 South Bannock Street 3415 South Acoma Street 3427 South Acoma Street 3447 -93 South Acoma Street 3448 -90 South Acoma Street If the City Council decides to list the properties for acquisition, then it is the responsibility of the Urban Renewal Authority to negotiate a purchase price with the owners of the properties. All tenants will be provided re- location benefits as outlined in the Urban Renewal Authority Relocation Handbook. It is not the responsibility of the City Council to consider the purchase price of properties or relocation benefits. Please confine your comme nts and questions to the amendments to the Plan that I previously mentioned. At the end of the public hearing, the Council will receive a recoaaendation from the Urban Renewal Authority to list additional properties for acquisition. This request includes the following properties: 1. Parking lots south of Firat Interstate Bank 2. 3311 South Broadway 3. Leases within 3315 -3386 South Broadway 3340 -3384 South Ac~ 33 -95 West Girard Avenue. The Council will continue tonight's public hearing on the above mentioned properties to next Monday, March 26 at~ p .a . • I • • - • (_ • I . CALL TO ORDER . • • • URBAN RENEWAL AUTHORITY February 8, 1984 The rescheduled regular meeting of the Urban Renewal Authority was called t o order at 6:45 P. M. by Chairman Robert J . Voth. Members pres ent: Novicky , Minnick, Cole, Voth, Neal, Totton Powe rs, Executive Director Member s absent: Va n Dyke Also pres ent: Alternate URA member Mcintyre Economic Development Planner Wm. Richard Hinson Directo r of Engineering Services Gary Diede Ci ty Manager McCown Jim VanHuesen , Muller Engineering Kei th Meye r, DeLeuw Cather Mike Sweeney, TransPlan Roland Vaughan, Perez Associates EDDA member John Maxwell Thomas R. Fitzpatrick, Former URA member II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES . January 11, 1984 Ch airman Voth stated that the Minutes of January 11 , 1984 were to be considered for approval . Minnick moved: ovicky s conded : The Minutes of January 11, 1984 be approved as written. The motion carried, with Mr. Totton abstaining. Mr . Voth suggested that inasmuch as full membership of the Authority is not present a this time, that the order of the agend a be changed to delay the el~ction of officers for the coming year. Mr. Voth suggested that with all the guests present at the meeting, everyone introduc themselves. Mr. Voth stated that the Authority would now proceed to consider Item V, New Business. V. NEW BUSINESS. A. Traffic Circulation Plan for Downtown. Ms. Powers stated that Muller Engineering has a contract with TransPlan of Boulder for traffic consulting, and that Brady Corporation and Perez Associates hav a contract with DeLeuw Cather as traffic consultant. Ms. Powers stated that Mr. Keith Meyer from DeLeuw Cather has been asked to discuss som of the circulation issues that have arisen with the inception of the new Plan • I • • ~ • • • • -2- Mr. Heyer provided an overview of the traffic circulation alternatives for the project area. Discussion ensued. Mr. Meyer discussed the impact of the traffic pattern on Broadway, and suggested that South Acoma Street from the Boulevard curving around to South Broadway be designated for one-way southbound traffic in the first phase, with phase two including the continuation of a one-way cou plet involving Hampden Avenue and Girard Avenue east o f Broadway. The eastern terminus of the one-way couplet was suggested by Mr. Meyer to be South Logan Street, and he emphasized that this should be considered in con- junction with the n e eds of the Swedish Medical Center. The po ssibility of designating part of the Boulevard west of Broadway for one-way traffic has also been proposed, according t o Mr. Meyer. However, they do not feel this is a good solution, and would s uggest that this re- main open to two-way traffic flow. Mr. Novicky asked if it would lessen congestion if Acoma were to be made one-way through the King Soopers area. Mr. Meyer noted that it did not appear there would be that much of a problem with two-way traffic in that block. Mr . Vaughan stat ed that a one-way pattern would be a disadvantage for the King Soopers Store; they need access from both directions. Mr. Meyer stated the two -way pattern on Ac oma in the King Soopers block would have the potential of "spreading out the exiting" movements; he did not regard a one-way pa ttern in this block as a strong advantage. Mr. Totton suggested that the ramps to west-bound U.S . 285 c ould help alleviate some of the problem on Broadway. Mr. Meyer s tated that they will s erve a s part of the alleviation of the exiting process. Mr. Minn ick pointed out that there is a mid-block walk through in the 3400 block of South Broadway. He predicted that there would b e heavy pedestrian traffic with people parking in the parking lot to the east side of South Broadway and trying to cross Broadway to get to the re- developed a r ea . He asked if consideration had been given to a mid-block exitin g point on the we s t side of Broadway in the 3400 bloc k. Mr. Meyer s tated that this is a fairly short block, and a mid-block exiting point would only compound the congestion problem. Mr . Vaughan discussed the maneuvering for delivery trucks to the King Soopers site. Loading areas will be enclosed. Mr. Meyer discussed n ew or improved signalization at Hampden and Broadway, Girard and Broadway, the Boulevard at Acoma, Bannock, Hampden Place, and the intersection with U. S. 285. Mr. Vaughan discussed the parking facilities that are planned. King Soopers will have 280 parking spaces at ground level in front of their store; there will be a second deck of parking to bring the total number of parking spaces i n this block to approximately 400. Points of access would be from th e north and from Broadway. Mr. Minnick asked about the bus routes coming in from the Conifer area; woul d they access the boulevard at the U.S. 285 intersection and travel around the bo ul evard to the area on South Acoma where the buses are to I • • • • • • -3- collect. Mr. Vaughan stated that from meetings they have had with RTD, it appears that RTD is going away from the "park 'n ride", and going t o "pulse points", or stopping areas where buses from different routes col- lect, and transfers to other routes are made. Mr. Meyer s tated that the intent is to have several "pulse points" throughout the redevelopment area. Mr. Vaughan stated that it is possible that a "pulse point" will be needed closer to King Soopers for those shoppers who do not dr i ve. Mr. Voth asked if a one-way couplet on U.S. 285 and Ithaca is ever ac- complished, what effect this pattern would have on the traffic pattern proposed in the downtown area . Mr. Meyer stated that he did n o t feel it would have that much impact on the traffic pattern as a whole; the main point of impact would be the intersection of the boulevard with U. S. 285, and this might have to have minor redesign. Mr. Diede asked if parking would be permitted on the east side between Girard and Floyd if the two-way pattern was retained for a couple of years. Mr. Meyer stated that it might be possible to have on-street parking for a short dis tance, and stated the need for the street design to "flare o ut" at the intersection, and then taper back. Ms. VanDyke entered the meeting at 6:40 P. M. and took her place with the members of the Authority. Mr. Mcintyre expressed interest in the buildings to the east of King Soopers. Mr. Vaughan stated that the new retail buildings would front on South Broadway with access from Broadway; merchants do not want two primary access points to businesses because of increased security prob- lems. Mr. Vaughan stated that the retail businesses along Broadway will be two level shopping areas, with an elevator from the top level parking a rea to access the Broadway frontage. Mr . Vaughan stated that there would be service access to the rear of these businesses, but not shopper access. Ms. Powers asked the Authority's opinion of the traffic plan as proposed. What is the feeling of the members regarding the one-way pattern on South Acoma Street. Mr. Voth stated that it appeared that perhaps some of the money available for improvements to buildings along Broadway could be better spent improving the rear of the structures. Ms. Powers stated that the money can be used to improve th e rear of the structures. Mr. Novicky stated that he likes the idea of the one-way pattern on Acoma from the Boulevard curving to Broadway. He stated that he thinks this pattern would eliminate a lot of congestion and back-up of traffic on Broadway. Mrs. Cole stated that she would agree the one-way pattern would seem to work much more smoothly for bus traffic and getting into and out of the parking facilities. Mr. Totton stated that h e felt there could be a lot of problems at the Girard/Broadway intersection if the first block of the Boulevard west is two-way. Mr. Meyer suggested that if the two-way pattern is retained on Girard east • I • - • • • • • -4- of Broadway, this inters e ction will b e severely congested. He stated that within the next two weeks, they will be exploring f urther the eastern terminus of the one-way pattern on Girard and Hampden. Mr. Fitzpa trick asked if the curve radius on the Boulevard has been determined. Mr. Diede stated that the Boulevard has been designed for 25 mph traffic. Mr. Minnick asked the location planned for the utility l ine s; would the y be in the center of the street, or to the side of the right-o f-way. Mr. Va nHu sen stated that those utilities that need a lot of acce ss would be on the side of the right-of-way. Mr . Voth and Ms. Powers expressed the apprecia tion of the Authority for the attendance of the gentlemen from Muller Engineering, TransPlan, DeLeuw Ca t her, and Perez Associates. III . RE-ORGANIZATION OF URBAN RENEWAL AUTHORITY. Mr . Voth stated that he would entertain nominations for Chairman of the Authority for the com ing year. Mr. Novicky nominated Mr. Voth as Chairman of the Authority. Ms. VanDyke seconded the nomination. Minnick moved : The nominations be closed, and Mr. Voth elected Chairman by acclamation. The motion was seconded and carried. Mr. Voth stated that the Chair would entertain nominatio ns for Vice- Chairman. Ms. VanDyke nominated Mr. No vicky as Vice-Chairman. Mrs. Cole seconded the nomination . Minnick moved: The nominations be closed and Mr. Novicky elected Vice- Chairman by acclamation. The motion was second d by Ruth Cole, and the motion carried. IV. APPOINTMENT OF SFCRETARY. Mr. Voth stated that the Authority needs to appoint an Execu tive Secretary for the Authority . Minnick moved: Novicky seconded: Susan Powe rs be appointed Executive Secretary of the Urban Ren ewal Authority. The motion carried unanimously • I • • • • • • -5- V. NEW BUSINES S B. Contract with Muller Engineering. Ms. Powers stated that a contract with Muller Engineering was in the packet sent to the Authority. The staff was directed at the last meeting of the Authority to negotiate this contract with Muller for the design of the Civic Center Boulevard. Mr. Diede, Director of Engineering Ser- vices, will be responsible for the administration of this contract on be- half of the Urban Renewal Authority. Ms. Powers stated that th ere have been some mi nor changes in the contract since the Authority received their copies. These changes were reviewed with the Authority, several of the changes being cost changes. Mr. Diede reviewed the proposed contract, and stated that Muller Engineering is being asked to design the Civic Center Boulevard and seven intersections; they would also design Acoma Street from Girard to Broadway, and Cherokee Street from Floyd to the Boulevard. Mr. Neal asked if the water lines to be installed in this area would be designed for the proper pressure to avoid the necessity of sprinklering. Mr. Diede s tated that the lines to be installed will be large enough so that pressure will not be restricted. Mr. Diede stated that easements and locations for lines for Public Service and Mountain Bell are not con- tained in this contract, and pointed out that there are problems associated with the relocation of service lines of these two companies. Mr. Diede stated that the proposal is that all utility lines be placed underground in the redevelopment area. Mrs. Cole asked whose responsibility it is to pay for moving the utility lines. Mr. Diede stated that this is the point of concern, and cited a memorandum from Paul Benedetti regarding payment for relocation of utility 1 ines . Mr. McCown stated that one of the biggest unknowns in this re- development project is the utility costs. Ms. Powers asked if the preliminary design time element was practical. Mr. Diede stated that it is practical; they feel the preliminary designs can be prepared and submitted about the first of April. ~lr. Diede further discussed the work that will be done such as stubbing lines into buildings, pipes for electrical lines, etc. The hope is to "build the street once and not tear it up." Ms. Powers pointed out a few changes in the wording of the contract that were requested by Urban Renewal Authority Attorney Jim Harm. Mr. Minnick stated that it is necessary to make sure the public is well informed , and suggested the use of a tape recorder during meetings be- tween the Urban Renewal Authority and other public bodies. Mr. Voth stated that the Chair would entertain a motion regarding the agreement with Muller Engineering, and to authorize Executive Director Powers to sign on behalf of the Authority. Mrs. Cole asked if Muller Engineering is committed to the final figure of $198,070 cited in the contract for the preliminary and final design work. Mr. Diede stated that there is not a lot of 1 -way for problems that may arise, and create the need for additional design work • I • • • • • • -6- Minnick moved: Novicky seconded: The Urban Renewal Authority approve the contract with Muller Engineering for the preliminary and final de- sign of Civic Center Boulevard from Broadway to U.S. 285, and authorize Executive Director Susan Powe r s The motion carried. to sign this contract on behalf of the Urban Renewal Authority. C. McLaughlin Water Engineers Contract. Ms. Powers asked Mr. Diede to review this contract for design o f Little Dry Creek improvements through the Downtown Area. Mr. Diede discussed the problems that will be experienced in development of the two lakes along the Little Dry Creek. Mr. Diede noted the need to build the lakes in a "bowl", and a lining of these bowls to eliminate the seepage of water into or out of the lakes. Mr. Diede stated that a lot of soils investigation is being done. Mr. Diede noted that there is approximately a 10-foot drop in elevation from Broadway to the point where the lakes will be constructed, and the eastern-most lake will be at a higher elevation than the second lake. The use o f fiber dams is being considered on these lakes. Mr. Diede stated that determination must also be made that problems will not be caused upstream because the water in the lakes will not be allowed to seep into the soil. Ms. VanDyke asked if an analysis had been done on the issue of the depth of the lakes. Mr. Diede stated that they cannot be shallow, or there will be a large problem with the growth of algae. Ms. VanDyke stated that her concern is the safety factor on the depth of the lakes. Mr . Diede discussed the circulation of the water in these two lakes, and the use of one circulation system vs. a separate circulation system for each lake. Mr. Diede stated that this contract with McLaughlin Water Engineers is o nly for the preliminary design work; he cited such unknowns as soil testing, water table and liner for lakes as matters that need further review and consideration. Mr. Diede stated that the box culvert under the Boulevard must be redone as a part of the street construction on the Boulevard. Mr. Voth stated that the Chair will entertain a motion to accept the contract as written with McLaughlin Water Engineers, and to authorize Executive Director Powers to sign on behalf of the Authority. It wa s moved and seconded THAT THE URBAN RENEWAL AliTHORITY ACCEPT THE CONTRACT FOR PRELIMINARY DESIGN WITH MC LAUGHLIN WATER ENGINEERS FOR LITTLE DRY CREEK THROUGH The motion carried . THE DOWNTOWN, AND THAT EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR POWERS BE AUTHORIZED TO SIGN ON BEHALF OF THE ENGLEWOOD URBAN RENEWAL AliTHORITY. • I • • • • • • -7- Ms. Powers discussed the process to be followed to get the funds in the Urban Renewal Authority account to finance the work done on the contracts. She stated that a request will be made to th e City Cou ncil to transfer funds from the Public Improvement Fund to the Urban Renewal Authority account. D. Lease of Chamber of Commerce Building. Ms. Powers stated that the Urban Renewal Authority purchase of the Cen - tennial Chamber of Commerce property at 180 West Girard Avenue was closed on February 1st. It will be necessary for the Chamber to continue to oc- cupy the building for sev eral weeks until their new quarters are ready for occupancy. A proposed lease between the Urban Renewal Authority and the Centennial Chamber has been presented ; the lease price is $150 per month. The proposed lease was reviewed by Jim Harm, counsel to the Urban Renewal Authority, and was approved . Discussion ensued. VanDyke Moved: Cole seconded: The Urban Renewal Authority approve the lease with the Centennial Chamber of Commerce, leasing the property at 180 West Girard Avenue to the Centennial Chamber of Commerce for $150 per month. Ms. Powers stated that the Authority might also want to give some thought to the possible use of this building by Brady as a construction office. The vote on the motion was called: The motion carried; Mr. Novicky voted in opposition. E. Construction of Little Dry Creek Improvements East of Broadway. Ms . Powers stated that part of the work on the Little Dry Creek improve- men t s will necessarily have to be done in conjunction with the Safeway development at U.S . 285 and South Logan Street. It appears that th ere will be a cost savings if a retaining wall can be built at the same time the store is constructed. This retaining wall is adjacent to the bike trail along the Creek. Ms. Powers asked Mr. Diede to further explain the problem. Mr. Diede addressed the problem that could occur if the retairdng wall was constructed first, or if the construction on the store was begun first, and if the work was done by different contractors. The wall is ap proximately 12 feet away from the Safeway structure, and would be be- low the Safeway structure, thereby necessitating simultaneous construc- tion of the two structures. Mr. Diede discussed the possibliity of bidding the two projects together, and stated that this has been cleared with the City Attorney who approved it as still being "competitive bidding." Mr. Diede stated that the bids for the project will be received on February 15th, and the Urban Renewal Authority would be asked to award the bid on the next Wednesday. It was the concensus of the Authority that could be called for February 22nd to award on Littl Dry Creek • if needed, a special meeting the bid for the retaining wall • I • • • • • • -B- Mr. Diede excused himself from the meeting. F. Downtown Redevelopment Plan. Ms. Powers stated that several areas of the Downtown Redevelopment Plan have been revised to reflect the current redevelopment plan proposed by Brady Corporation. Ms. Powers pointed out that the adopted Redevelopment Plan is a "specific" plan, and the amended edition is a more general plan. Ms. Powers referred to a list of the changes noting word changes, deletions, and additions to the Plan. The list of properties to be acquired has been modified to include the property at 3401 South Bannock Street as directed by the Authority at the last meeting. Mr. Novicky pointed out that on Page 16 there is a statement on the cost of the public and private improvements for parking structures; he questioned that this statement should be included as it appeared to bind the Authority to paying for parking structures. Discussion ensued. This statement was deleted from the text. Mrs. Cole asked if the parking structures would be paid parking or free parking. Ms. Powers stated that it is anticipated that the parking struc- tures will be free. She stated that it would be difficult to justify paid parking when Cinderella City free parking is in such close proximity. Mr. Neal suggested that a validation system could be used if the parking is not free. Mr. Neal stated that it the responsibility of the City to provide parking for the City Hall and Library structures. The Financing section has been modified, and is based on projections on t he new plan prepared by Steve Bell of Hanifen-Imhoff. Further discussion on the financing of the redevelopment public projects ensued . Mr. Novicky asked if he was correct that the Authority would have to finance approximately $10,000,000 of public improvement projects. Ms. Powers stated that it may be a little more than the $10,000,000. Mr. Neal pointed out that the construction of the new King Soopers store has been advanced in time, nor does it include other new stores that are proposed in the improvement area. Mr. Totton asked if there was any information on the interest rate for the bonds. Mr. McCown stated that 9.5% is the current rate. Ms. VanDyke asked if this rate was firm, or if it is variable. Ms. Powers discussed a financing schedule that had been prepared based on meetings with Mr. Bell. This chart shows what the projected costs are , and the sources of revenue--bonds, Authority (City), or Redeveloper. The cost of these improvements have been split into two bond issues, the first of which is projected in April, 1984. Ms. Powers stated that a second bond issue would occur in November, 1984. Mr. Novicky discussed the land acquisition section of the Plan, and the n eed to segregate Authority activities from City activities to eliminate City liability. He stated that it appears there is a "crossing of lines" here. Ms. Powers pointed out that the City does have the power of eminent domain, and while the Plan may say "either/or", the important thing is who actually does it • • I • • • • • -9- *Mr. Neal stated that at the time the original draft of the Plan was done, the entire west side of South Acoma Street was included in the list for acquisition, as well as a portion of the east side of South Acoma Street in the 3400 block. These properties were later excluded from the final Plan at the request of the property owners, who wanted to negotiat e with the redeveloper directly. These property owners have since complained that their property has not been included for acquisition by the Authority, and that they will not be eligible for relocation payments from the Au- thority. Mr. Neal suggested that there was no reason to exclude these prope rti c>s from the list of acquisition, inasmuch as these properties are required for public improvements in the Plan. If it is, as he has h ea rd, true that these property owners will not make a deal with the developer, he felt the Authority may be in trouble down the road in trying to complete the im- provements on Little Dry Creek if these properties are not included now. Mr. Neal stated that he had inquired of one businessman in the 3400 block of South Acoma if he wanted or minded if his property was listed in the Plan for acquisition, and h e did not get a yes or no in answer; the gentle- man said he would have to discuss it. Mr. Neal stated that he felt it would be prudent for the Authority to include these properties at this time when other amendments are being made to the Plan. Mr. Voth pointed out that even if these properties are included in the Plan, this would not prec l ude the redeveloper acquiring them on his own. Discussion ensued. No vicky moved: VanD yke seconded: The motion carried. The List of Properties to be acquired by the Authority he expnndcd to list those prop e rt ies o n the we s t side of the 3400 block South Acoma Street, and those prop- erties on the east side of the 3400 block South Acoma Street with ownership in common with the west side of the 3400 block of Acoma, recognizing there may be further developments we are not aware of at this time. Mr . Totton asked if the Authority had anyone to negotiate on the purchase of these properties. Ms. Powers s tated that the Authority does have a negotiator on contract. *Mr. Neal pointed out that the Urban Renewal Authority cannot designate property for acquisition; this is a cooperative action with City Council. Novicky moved: Cole seconded: The motion carried. *As amended 3/7/84 • The Urban Renewal Authority approve the amendments to the Downtown Redevelopment Plan and reco-end to City Council the amendments be approved. I • - • ' • • • • -10- VI . OLD BUSINES S. Ms. Powers stated that in the future, when th Authority approves property f o r acquis ition, the legal counsel has reque ted that this be done by resolution and not by motion of the Authority. Also, the Executive Director should be designated to sign the closing papers on behalf of the Authority. Ms. Powers stated that Resolution #3, Series of 1984, h as been prepared to effect the closing on property at 3550-54 South Broadway, which closing has been scheduled for February 13. This is the Swarman property on the east side of South Broadway, and is needed for improvements to Little Dry Creek. Novicky moved: VanDyke seconded: The motion carried. The Urban Renewal Authority adopt Resolution #3, Series of 1984, entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE URBAN RENaJAL AUTHORITY TO ACQUIRE THE PROPERTY AT 3550-54 SOUTH BROADWAY, ENGLaJOOD, COLORADO AND TO AUTHORIZE THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE THE INSTRUMENT OF SALE. Ms. Powers stated that the Authority counsel has also asked that a motion reaffirming the authorization of the Executive Director to sign the closing documents for the purchase of the Centennial Chamber of Commerce property. VanDyke moved: Novicky seconded: The motion carried. The Authority hereby affirms that Executive Director Susan Powers was authorized to sign the closing papers for the acquisition of property at 180 West Girard Avenue on behalf of the Englewood Urban Renewal Authority. Mr. Hinson reported on the status of proceedings on 3601 South Logan St reet. The Courts will now appoint a "commission" who will set the value for this service station. If the value determined by this Com- mission exceeds the amount on deposit from the Authority with the courts, additional funds will have to be paid. If the value determined is lower than the amount on deposit, refund would be made to the Authority. Mr. Harm has stated that the billboards may be removed from the property at any time by giving notice to the corporation owning the billboards. Mr . Hinson reported that 4702 South Washington is being cleaned preparatory to being listed for sale • VII. PUBLIC FORUM. Mr. Maxwell stated that he had nothing to discuss under this section of the agenda. VIII. DIRECTOR'S CHOICE. Ms. Powers stated that she had nothing to discuss at this time • I • • • • • • • -11- IX. COMMISSIONER'S CHOICE. Mr . Voth stated that members were handed a roster of membership earlier in the meeting; he asked that each member indicate the time of day and a number where it is easiest to reach them. The meeting adjourned at 9:00 P. M. • I • -• • • Engl&O:ld Parks and Recreaticn Ccmnissicn Minutes of February 9, 1984 Tile regular !llXlthly treeting of the Englewood Parks and Recreation Ccmnission was called to order at 5: 35 p .m. by Olairman Jack Poole at the Englewood tblicipal Golf Course Clubhouse. t11!rbers present : Allen, Boaranan, Bradshaw, Ganes, Higday, Hixon, Poole, Rademacher, Ranans, ex officio Ml5rbers absent : lbward Also present : Leon I<uln, Assistant Director of Parks and Recreation [bug Foe, Assistant Director of Parks and Recreation Dr . Gatewood Milligan, Olairman of Malley Senior Center Advisory Catrnittee Karen Boarcmm, Daughter of Ccumissioner Robert Boaranan Olainron Poole asked if there were any additions or corrections to the minutes of January 12, 1984. 'nlere were none. A notion was mde and seconded that the minutes be .-pproved as written. 1be notion passed. Olainnan Poole referred to page 2 of the January 12, 1984 minutes wherein he inquired about the possibility of meubers of the Parks and Recreation staff being included in School/City O:mnittee meetings and asked if Director :'anans spoke to City Manager McCIMl concerning this matter . Ranans indicated that he 118\tioned to the City Manager that the Parks and Recreation Ccmnission is concerned that Parks and Recreation staff sOOuld attend the meetings loilen school staff meubers are present in order to clear up questi.ms that IIBY caDe up during the meetings. Olairman Poole anrlOlrlCed the reappointments to the Parks and Recreation Coumission of Robert Boaranan, reappointed by the School Board for a tet111 ending May 1, 1985; Beverly Bradshaw, reappointed by City C'.o\n:il for a term ending February 1, 1988; and Jack Poole, reappointed by the City Coi.Ilcil and School Board representatives for a tet111 ending February l, 1988. Caunissioner Boaraam introduced his daughter, Karen Boarcmm, to the Ccmnission \bJ attended the meeting as an observer . (. lX . GateololXXI Milligan, Chairolln of the Halley Senior Center Advisory Calmittee, was • present to inform the Comnission that the additional parking lot east of Malley Center hrul been sta rred , and 1\1 s n rhar n chanP,P ha~ been made concerning claRs refulds . In the I • • ,. fugleloOOd Parks and Recreation Coomis s ion ~es of February 9 , 1984 Page -2- • • - past, refln:is have been issued to individuals when initially they si.gp up for as many as eight classes at a time lohile intending to take cnly cne or two. 'This practice causes extra clerical ~.«>rk and, IIDre :intx>rtantly, prevents others fran enrolling in the class . In an effort to discourage that practice, the new policy will not allow for refmds once the classes begin. Dr . Milligan reported the Advisory Coomittee mderstands that the subject of rerouting Floyd Avenue is now being seriously considered, which 100\ll.d result in Sim:ln Center losing 17 of its visitor parking spaces. It is planned that these spaces will be replaced with parking spaces fran Malley Center's west parking lot. As was suggested at the NovaiDer 10. 1983 Parks and Recreation Ccmni.ssion UEeting, IX . Milligan is again approaching the Parks and Recreation Ccmnission to relay the concerns of the Advisory Calmi.ttee to City Colncil that parking acCCIIIIDdati.ons for Halley Center is a problEm and is always filled to the rnax.inun . He stated that lle also has the I.Rierstanding that land p.n·chased with federal fiSlds cannot be transferred to uses other than originally intended mle.ss replaced by Uu land . Ccmnissi.oner Bradshaw then stated that at a UEeting last Wednesday. the Pousing Autrority attorney indicated it was CD bonds that were used to construct Sim:ln Center which are different than federal funds and, therefore, the City is not bound by replacing the land . 1-bwever. she felt that the City is bound to provide the sane tlLIIber of parking spaces for the Simln Center . • Ccmnissialer Allen entered the UEeting at 5 :45p.m. After nuch discussion , Ccmnissi.oner Bradshaw stated she will ask Sue Powers, Director of Ccmn.nity Develop!Blt , to attend a special executive ccmnittee meeting of the Malley Advisory Ccmnittee to inform them in detail of the rerouting of Floyd Avenue and the effect it will have en parking for Siloon Center and Mal l ey Center . Dr. Milligan infonned the Ccmnissi.on that Kermit Carson is the new <llain!an of the Advisory Ccmnittee and any infor- ll&tion fran Sue Powers sOOul.d be relayed to him . Assistant Director I<uln passed out copies of the bid tabulation sheet for Belleview n Ballfield lighting and Belleview and Spa~Cer Ballfield falCing . I<uln stated it is his feeling that ~ood bi ds were received since he est imated approximately $61 ,000-$62 ,000 • I • • EnglBo«XXi Parks and Recreation Cannission Minutes of February 9, 1984 Page -3- • • • for the lighting and fencing for Belleview and Spencer fields. Mlupin Electric ~y had the low bid on lighting of $57,531, and O.E.C., Inc. had the lowest bid for fencing. O.E.C., Inc. declined the contract for fencing since they are not a fencing~· lWln then approached Mlupin wbJ agreed to buy out O.E.C. 's low fencing bid of $12,301. The total lighting and fencing bid fran Mlupin Electric came to $69,832. lWln indicated the bid includes rolophane lighting with 60 ft 0 steel poles 0 lWln stated that the existing 4 ft . fencing is being replaced with 8 ft. fencing to minimize player injuries. lWln stated the present fencing will be stock piled and the fencing will be used later for park fencing purposes . The old light fixtures may be auctioned at the City Auction or sold if the City can find a buyer . A ~letion date for the lighting and fencing project has been set at April 20, 1984 in time for the softball season. Ovlillllilll Poole asked if Public Service is still charging a "demand billing". Kum reported that Public Service is billing the City for a dal8\d service but he said he talked to Jim Ollmbe1a of the Public Service ~y and Mr. 0\lm)ers said that if he 1oiB8 notified when the testing of lights 1oiB8 to be aade, he \oiOUl.d set the meter back so there \oiOUl.d be no daDand charge. Ccmnissioner Higday inquired about the possibility of using the old ballfield lights for the golf course driving range. Director RaDms explained that these lights woo't give off 8lOllgh light to warrant the labor and cost of putting them up . After liiJCh discuss¥n and IIBI'lY suggestions, Olairman Poole suggested that the Parks and Recreation staff review ti-e feasibility of putting up the old ballfield lights and poles at the golf course driving range, stating that a lighted range is a revenue pr<Xb::er and a needed facility for IIBI'ly people in the 80I.ltl-a.leat metro area . Director RaDsns reported that 0.0 easeml!llts for trails, one along the South Platte • River and arother aloog Bear Creek, -were being requested by the South Suburban Recreation 8ld Park District . The "South Platte Trrti l" C"orlleet o t o the "Dl>slver Greenway" at Bates A\.oeonue and nns • I • • • • • Engleo.ood Parks and Recreation Ccmnission Minutes of February 9, 1984 Page-4- to ~Avenue . South Suburban Recreation and Park District will construct and maintain this portion of the trail . FU1ds will erne fran l!DneY raised by the South Sururban Trail F<Uldation headed by Mary Carter. The City of Filgleo.ood ccntributed $50,000 to this project. The "State Loop Ilemlnstration Trail" is being constructed by the South Platte Greenway Ccmnittee headed by Joe SOOanak.er. The fUlds for this trail C~X~Bists of $300,000 fran state park lottery fulda and other private dooations that are to be raised by the Greenway Coomittee . This trail will start at Jiall1>den Averrue , nn up along the north side of the South Platte River to the nouth of Bear Creek, then cross over Bear Creek to the 16th fair- ~o.oy of the Englelo«X>d Golf Course and nr1 south along the creek past Clay Street. The trail then will continue past Federal Avenue and Sheridan Avenue to Kipling loilere it will head north along Kipling to Sanderson CW.ch and then it will follow the gulch east to Ruby Hill at ~ch point it will join with the Denver Greenway Trail . South Sururban also plans to maintain this section of trail through the golf course ~ch is fran Clay Street to the OXJUth of Bear Creek. With a dr&loTing and maps, Mr . Romans traced the route of the ~ trails . Mr . Rc.ma1s reported that the City Engineering and Parks and Recreation Depart:ments asked for several ilqx:>rtant changes fran the original drawings and specificaticns requesting that the trail follow closer to the creek and to provide an 8 ft. 1" mesh chainlink fence along the 16th fa.i.n.ay to protect hikers fran stray golf balls . Mr. Romans also reported after these ~ trails are carpleted the City will need to look towards construction of the South Platte Trail fran liaqlden Avenue to Oxford Avenue along the Englelo«X>d Golf Course . The Corp of Filgineers will begin this Spring to place fill along the slopes of the South Platte River fran Oxford to Bear Creek outlet and will cut out a road bed for this trail . • The City of Filgleo.ood has applied for 50-50 lllltching of £\nds fran three different sources -the Federal Water and lAnd Conservation f\ni, the State Trail f\Dd and to the pl.arning branch of the Corp of Filgineers . The South Suburban Trail F<Uldation will also attBJllt to obtain private dooations to ~lete this section of the trail . Ch,f"'1<1n Pnole rProrn•c\ th<lt JV!h ~eam.'l of Urban f.dge!! indicated to hlm that the • I • • • 'EZ\gleloOC>d Parks and Recreation Ccmnission Minutes of February 9, 1984 Page -5- • • • FOI.Kldaticn will be applying for private dooations fran the Jotnsm and the Gates FOU'ldations. After nuch discussion, Ccmnissiooer Allen made a noticn, seconded by Q:mnissialer Ganes, that the Camlission make a recatmendation to City Council to provide an eas&!Blt to South Suburban Recreation and Park District to construct a hike and bike trail along the South Platte River fran Bates Avenue to Halqxl.en Avenue . The UDtion passed. Ct:mni.ssioner Allen made a second nDtion, seconded by Coomi.ssiooer Ganes, that the Q:mnission make a recaJJIIendation to City Cculcil to provide an easement to South SuWrban Recreation and Park District to construct a hike and bike trail along Bear Creek fran Clay Street to the I1DI.lth of Bear Creek . The notion passed. Coomi.ssioner Bradshaw stated she is very concerned with the liability issue with regard to these trails since a portion of the trails will be on City property and lllllinten- mce of the trails will be in the hands of others than the city . Aft.er uuch discussicn, Ccmnissiuner Bradshaw made a notion, seconded by Ccmnissioner Hixal, that the liability issue be t:h:lroughly investigated and included in the easement agreements for these tw:> trails. The notion paseed . Ccmnissioner Bradshaw reported that City Coln:il approved the Ccmni.asion' s recoomend- ation to place the Qmituff floor covering on the deck of the swimning pool. Cooceming the progress on construction of the Detention Pond, Director Ralals report- ed that l1arch 15, 1984 , has been set for the ~letion of sodding with the pressbox to be installed by March 30. He stated the tl&l shed has been put in, but in an \.Kldesirable location . Neighbors of the Detention Pond feel the structure blocks the view and does not provide an aesthetic situation. Discussion ensued 'Which included suggestions for relocation of the shed and the equip!Blt stored inside . Suggestions included the soutiw!st comer of the Sinclair auditoriun; near the track along side of the existing storage facility; and the space imlediately east of the Lowell Amex . Camdssioner Boarcban said he ~d pass on these possible alternate sites to the City/School Ccmnittee . • Referring to a letter that appeared in the Englew:xxi Saltinel fran Mrs . Wiggins • questioning the purpose of having tw:> indoor pools in Englewood, Director Ranans explained that Ik>rothv ~l quist acl ·t><i him to IMI<e 11 li'lt of reaRons in answer to this f1Ut!Stim . • I . • EngleloOC>d Parks and Recreation Comnission Minutes of February 9, 1984 Page -6- • • - Copies were distributed to the Ccmnission . Ibrothy Dalquist plans to form a letter for the Hayer in order that the Mayor can respood to Mrs. Wiggins explaining the City's pos- iti.at in this 11111tter . 0\ai.rmlln Poole reminded the Conmission of a special meeting with City Colncil on March 22, 1984, at 6:00p .m. in the Ubrary Conference Roan . Director RaDanB reported that he has asked Assistant Director Foe to check into the possibility of cross CO\.K\try skiing at the Englewood Golf Course for the Winter season beginning in Noveailer of 1984. Romans said that the best close-in ,cross c01.ntry skiing that will be available will be on the new river trails when they are CCIJl>leted . Foe stated his staff has checked with eight other golf courses in the area ald have fowd that only Pinerurst Ccultry Club allows cross eo~ntry skiing on their course . AIIDng itEm! to be considered are possible damage to the greens and tees along with vandalism that might be alCOUraged with free entry to the golf course. Coamissi.ater Bradshaw recaunended a fee charge so a:.; to control \b:l skis the course . Director Ra1ans reported that the interest in ClClq)Uters at Halley Center is growing so ouch so that. in additi.at to the c:clq)Uter donated by Elsie Halley in Deceailer, Betty Giirren, a meober of the Halley Center Adviaory Conmittee, has donated a tla\Cy gift of $2,000 to the Center for the purpose of p.ll"chasing a ~ter so that cooputer classes can be offered to Malley Center lll!llbers. Director Rcmms referred to the change in wording of two plaques that are to be 1"ulg in the new calllU\ity center (copies were included in the Ccmnissi.at' s packets). Romans expla.ined that City Hanager tt:c.o..t felt that Colbert E . D.Jshing's tw~e should appear as a carmittee llllllliler rather than past-chairman . 'The Ccmnission agreed that this was accept- able . Ranans went on to explain that Tan Fitzpatrick's name WBS rem.wed fran the plaque since the City Hanager indicated that no names have ever been placed on plaques of those wro are not in office at the tinE the project is built . In reference to the two youth llli!llbers wrose terlllll will expire in October, 1984, the Ccmnissi.at, after uuch diBCIJBSi.at, agreed that the names of Denise Hilwn ald Rebecca Rademacher will rta~in on the plaque althol..lgh they wilt nn lC"~~Lp,er be on ttvo Q.lllllrlssion at the time the cmmaity c enter is • • I • • • EngleloUOd Parks and Recreation Ccmni.ssion Minutes of February 9 , 1984 Page -7- dedicated . • • - Director Ranans reported that the EilgleloUOd Soccer Association has presented an agree- llll!nt for the use of Eilgle..oxi' s field facilities for the caning Spring season . RaDans stated there are no changes from last year's agreeoett and no problaus were reported by the Parks staff concerning the soccer association's use of City facilities. Ccmni.ssialer Galles made a I!Dtion, secooded by Conmissiooer Allen, to mske a recalllBldatioo to City Coln:il that the 1984 cootract between the City of Eilgle..oxi and Eilgle..oxi Soccer Assoc- iation for use of EilgleloUOd's field facilities be renewed as written. The UDtioo passed. Ulder Ccmuissiooer's croice, Ccmni.ssi.oner HiJccn annDI.KlCed that she has just returned from New York md she has received a $7,000 scholarship to play rockey at Potsdan State for next year. She ,... ooogratulated by the Ccmuission llll!lli:Jers . Callaissic.ller Boanmln inquired if my decision has been nade conceming IUlcan School . Director Roll8la stated that the building itself is costing the City a lot for upkeep, and e the possibility of relocating the nature center is being considered. It is likely that IIDBt of the activities now held at IUlcan will be DDVed to the CCIIIII.I\i.ty center when it is ~leted. Realms said he feels that a park area srould be preserved for that section • • of the CCIIIII.I\i.ty because it ,... pranised when the City Park,... sold to Gerri VonFrellick that all sections of the CCIIIII.I\i.ty wul.d have a neighborlDod park . It ,... agreed after considerable discussion that the City srould wait and see what the ac:hools wish to do with nn:..t Building before they mske recalllll!ndatians concerning the building. Conceming the nn\ing track at the new CCIIIIU\ity center, Oaamissic.ller Bradshaw asked if \Al.king will be allowed oo the track as well as tuning. ~. Rcnans said that he loU sure that walking wul.d be allowed . He asked Mr. Foe to call the~ coum.ni.ty centers to see if they have experienced mly problans with walkers oo their n.nUng tracks . The meet~,... adjoomed at 8 :10p.m. lJnda lks. Recording Secretary • I . • - • • • • • CITY OF ENGLEWOOD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 22, 1984 I. CALL TO ORDER. 5 c ' Th e regular meeting of the City Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order at 7:00 P. M. by Chairman McBrayer. Members present: McBrayer, Stoel, Tanguma, Venard, Barbre, Becker, Carson, Magnuson Susan Powers, Ex-officio Members absent: Allen Also present: Assistant Director Dorothy A. Romans Harold J . Stitt, Planner I City Attorney DeWitt II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES. February 7, 1984 Chairman McBrayer stated that the Minutes of February 7, 1984 were to be considered for approval. Carson moved: Stoel seconded: The Minutes of February 7, 1984 be approved as written. AYES: Stoel, Tanguma, Venard, Barbre, Becker, Carson, Magnuson, McBrayer NAYS: None ABSENT: Allen The motion carried. III. PLANNED DEVELOPME NT The Broadway CASE #13-84 Chairman McBrayer welcomed the members o f the audience to the meeting. Mr. McBrayer stated that the issue before the Commission is a Public Hearing on a proposed Planned Development to be knolo7ll as "The Broadway", to be located on property south and east of the Burt and Target develop- ments on South Broadway. Mr. McBrayer asked for a motion to open the Public Hearing. Tanguma moved: Carson seconded : The Public Hearing on Case #13-84 be opened. AYES: Tanguma, Venard, Barbre, Becker, Carson, Magnuson, McBrayer, Stoel NAYS: None ABSENT: Allen The motion carried. Mr. McBrayer stated that legal notice of the Public Hearing was published in the Englewood Sentinel on February 1, 1984; Certification of Posting has been presented by the applicant for the record, and Mr. McBrayer asked that the staff report be made a part of the record . • I • • • • - -2- Mr. McBrayer stated that the proposed development of the subject site is a 290-unit townhouse/condominium residential community. Under the Planned Development guidelines, the Commission will be considering such things as the location of buildings, parking, open space, points of in- gress and egress, traffic flow, landscaping, etc. Mr. McBrayer stated that following review of the staff report, hearing the presentation by the applicant, and hearing comments from members of the audience both pro and con, the Commission will then consider action on the request. The Commission may recommend approval of the Planned Development as submitted; recommend approval of the Planned Development with conditions, or refer the Planned Development back to the applicant for further re- vision. Mr. McBrayer asked that anyone wishing to address the Commission come to the podium, give their name and address and be sworn in. He asked that testimony be limited to the issue before the Commission, and noted that there is a sign-up sheet circulating through the audience for those who want to speak to the Commission. Mr. McBrayer asked if the members of the Commission had questions o f the staff regarding the staff report. Mr. McBrayer asked if the staff had anything they wished to add at this point. Mr. Stitt pointed out that on Page 2 of the staff report, the maximum density is listed as 40 units per acre; there is a bonus factor in the existing R-3 Ordinance, which could increase the maximum density to 70 units per acre, or a total theoretical maximum of 1400+ units for this site. Mr. Tanguma asked for clarification of the R-E Estate zoning in Littleton. Mr. Stitt stated that it is a very low-density single-family residential zone district. Mr. Mc Braye r wa s presented with the sign-in she ets, and asked that the a pplicant s ma ke t hei r pre s e ntation at t his t ime . Mr. Bill Baer, 2910 Eas t 6th Av e nu e , wa s s wo rn i n. He t e st if i e d t ha t he, Mess r s . Rand y Brown , Dal e Bo y d, Da s e l Hallmar k a nd Sco t t Ha yden have wo rke d together for over eight years , and hav e developed ma ny p r ojec t s in the metro area. Mr. Baer s t a t e d t ha t h e would like it made clear that the issue before the Commission is no t a "rezoning" hearing , but a hearin g on a Planned Development to accommodate proposed development permitted in the present zone classification. Mr . Baer stated that the applicants have worked closely with the Plann ing staff in the preparation of the proposed Planned Developmen t . Mr . Baer stated that the matter of access was an issue early on in the discussions, and at a meeting attended by City of Englewood staff and representatives of Greenwood Village, Littleton and Arapahoe County, this was discussed in detail. They have developed a "loop" roadway system to serve the development, and there will be no ac- cess other than from South Broadway . Mr. Baer stated that it is the aim of the applicants to develop a low-scale project of a residential character , a total of 290 units, 14 .7 units per gross acre in density. These un i ts will be townhomea and condominiums; some of the townhomes will have tuck- in garages, or walk-out basements. He stated that all buildings are oriented down the southern slope of the property . A 25-foot setback from adjoining property lines is proposed all a r ound the development, and a shade/shadow study assured that a 2 P.M. shadow would remain on their property. Th applicants agree to wid n the bridge on South Btoad- way at Big Dry Creek, and agre to "stabilize" th banka of Big Dry Cr ek • • I • • • • • • • • -3- Mr. Baer emphasized that the density they have proposed, 290 units, is approximately 1/5 of the density allowed, and the development responds to the site specific and will be an asset to Englewood. Mr. Carson asked if the applicants have read the recommendations from the Planning staff, and do the applicants agree with these recommenda-tions. Mr. Baer stated that the applicants have read the recommendations, and only have a question on Item 10; in discussions they have had with Urban Drainage only one maintenance access ramp was requested; however, if Urban Drainage has determined that two maintenance access ramps are re- quired, the applicants would comply. Mr. Carson asked the type of construction to be used in the Planned De- velopment. Mr. Baer stated that the buildings would be of frame con-struction. Mr. McBrayer stated that there seems to be some concern on the part of the residents on Sunset Lane regarding the proposed development. He asked if Mr. Baer would indicate where Sunset Lane is in relation to the pro- posed development. Mr. Baer suggested that perhaps one of the residents on Sunset Lane could better point out the relation of that street to the proposed development. Mrs. Romans suggested that the Commission members might review the map included with the staff report to determine the lo- cation of Sunset Lane in relation to the development. The height of the structures was discussed. Mr. Baer discussed the topog- raphy of the site, and noted that the townhomes would be two storie on the up-hill side, with the tuck-in garage or basement on the low r sid . Mr. McBrayer estimated that this would mean an average of 2-1/2 stori s height on the average grade of the land. Mr. McBrayer asked if there were other members of the applicant team wh o were to speak to the Commission. Mr. Baer stated that this would conclud the basic presentation; other members would be available for specific questions. Mr. McBrayer asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak in favor of the proposed development. No one in the audience spoke in favor of the proposal . Mr. McBrayer then called on Ms. Linda Fornof, and asked Ms. Forno£ if she wished to address the Commission. Ms. Linda Fornof, 5675 S. Washington, was sworn in, and stated that she had several questions to pose to the Commission . Is this site in the 100- year flood plain; has this issue been addressed. Mr. Stoel cited Statement 1111 of the staff report and staff conditions, which states: "The 100-year flood plain limit should be shown on the Develop- ment Plan. The flood plain exceeds the channel limits at the south end of the property and should be so documented." Mr. McBrayer stated that it is evident that the issue of flood plain has been addressed. Ms. Fornof staled that with a density of 290 units, this would mean a • I • • • • • .. • -4- population of approximately 500 people in this area and the staff has said that this is substantially lower than what could be permitted. She stated that as far as being a neighbor of the proposed development, and a resident of an area with large lots that permits the keeping of large animals, she did not feel that the addition of 500 people onto ·the subject site would be beneficial to the life-style of the adjoining resi- dents, She stated that the animals might be offensive to the residents of the proposed development, and questioned whether these new residents might be able to bring pressure to bear to force the elimination of the animals from their neighborhood, Mr. Carson stated that the City of Englewood has a very strict animal control law. Ms. Fornof stated that the residents of their area do have animals, and her concern was that residents of the proposed development could cause problems for those residents of the adjacent area that do enjoy having the large animals. Ms. Fornoff stated that she wanted to be on record in opposition to the proposed Planned Development. She stated that she has lived in this area for approximately eight years, and has seen some encroachment of higher intensity development during this eight year period. She stated that she did not feel the proposed development would be of the quality or nature that they would want to live next to. Mr. McBrayer asked Ms. Fo rnof what she envisioned as the optimum use of this land, Ms. Fornof stated that she would like to see a park de- veloped in this area, and understood that at one point in time there was discussion about the adjoining governmental entities joining to- gether to develop the land for park purposes. Mr. McBrayer pointed out that this property is privately owned, and that the property owner does hav the right to use the land, Ms. Fornof stated that she still felt th land should be used for some so rt of open area, but if the land had to b "commercially" developed, it should have the lowest possible density. Sh pointed out that this site abuts sites of one to two acre size, and suggested that pe rhap s a zone classification similar to the Residential Estate classification might be appropriate, Mr. David Fornof, 5675 South Wash ington, was sworn in. Mr. Fornof asked if the residents of the area could be assured that this development would end at the southern boundary of the property; could it be extended across Littleton land to get access at East Powers Avenue, Mr. McBrayer stated that he did not think this would be possible. Mrs. Romans stated that the staff has met with the representatives from Littleton, and Littleton's position is that in no event would there be access from this property into Littleton. Mrs. Romans pointed out that any development on property in Littleton would be under the purview of the Littleton Planning Commission and the Littleton City Council. Mr. Fornof asked if there is a fence or divider proposed along the southern boundary of the site. Mr. McBrayer stated that it appeared that a fence or landscaping would be the buffer; this would be clarified with the ap-plicant. Mr. McBrayer called on Mr. Merle Frey; Mr. Frey stated that he would defer speaking at this time. Mr. John Campbell, 5560 South Washington, was sworn in. He testified that he had heard nothing about an environmental impact statement being • I • • • • • -5- done for the proposed development. Mr. Campbell also discussed concerns about traffic that would be generated by the imposition of 290 living units in the area. Mr. Campbell asked if the development would be rentals with absentee land-lords, or would it be owner-occupied. He stated that they want to know "what kind of neighbors they would be getting", and that if the development would be rental units, he would object . He does not object to townhomes that would be sold. Mr. Campbell asked if there was a breakdown on the number of condos vs. the number of townhomes pro- posed in the development . What is the amount of "greenbelt" that is pro- posed. He noted that the 25 ft. setback cited was a good figure, but to compare it to the 5 ft. setback in Littleton is only "juggling figures." Mr . Campbell inquired about police and fire protection, and about noise created by the development. He asked what the residents of this develop- ment would do on weekends and holidays, and where they would go if open space were not provided on the site . Mr. Campbell also discussed the fact that the residents of the R-E area keep large animals; it is a unique rural area and they want to protect it. Mr. Campbell inquired what the total population projection for the development is; will roomers and boarders be allowed. Mr. Campbell pointed out that some of the structures appear to have three levels; how high will these structures actually be. Mr. Campbell then discussed Big Dry Creek, and recalled that the bridge at Broadway was washed out a number of years ago because of flooding on Big Dry Creek . If the contour of the Creek is changed for the benefit of the proposed development, will the water back up into the adjoining residential areas. Mr. McBrayer stated that the plans for the proposed Planned Development have been referred to the Police and Fire Departments, their recommenda- tions and comments have been received and noted in the staff report. Mr. McBrayer deferred to Mrs. Romans on the issue of roomers and boarders. Mrs. Romans pointed out that the site is zoned for R-3, High Density Resi- dential use. Even in the R-1-C Single-family zone district, one roomer or boarder is permitted. Mrs. Romans stated that she felt the size of the units as proposed would preclude the letting of rooms to a boarder. Mr. McBrayer asked Mr. Baer to s tep forward to answer some of the questions raised by opponents. Mr. McBrayer stated that the issue of animal keepin g has been raised, and the fear that residents of the proposed development would try to prevent residents of the adjoining area from keeping animals on their property has been raised. Mr. McBrayer asked if Mr. Baer cared to address this. Mr. Baer stated that if the keeping of animals is going on now, and any prospective purchaser in the proposed development is aware of it but opposed to animals, he would not anticipate they would complete the purchase. Mr. McBrayer asked about screening on the south side of the property. Mr. Baer stated that the proposed treatment on the south side of the property is landscaping and trees as shown on the plan. This is what they are committing to do. Mr. Baer stated that there will not be fencing on the south side of the property; the only fencing that is shown is that which is between this site and the Burt Chevrolet site. The height limitation was addressed. Mr. Baer stated that the buildings that the opponents cit d s three story , are the town homes, which are two stories on the up-hill side, with the tuck-in garage or basement; the height of these structures would be under 40 ft. maximum • • I • • • • • - -6- In response to a question from Chairman McBrayer, Mrs. Romans stated that the maximum permitted height of structures in the R-3 High Density Zone District is 60 feet . Mr. Baer addressed the question of the flood plain. Mr. Hallmark had prepared a drainage study, which was submitted, and clearly shows the 100-year flood plain on the Plan. Mr. Baer indicated the line on the Development Plan denoting the boundary of the 100-year flood plain. Mr. Baer further described what a Planned Development is, and pointed out that if this plan is approved by the City, this commits the developer to exactly what is shown on the plan regarding the location and size of structures, landscaping, parking, etc. They must build to this Plan. Mr. Phil DuBois, #6 Sunset Lane, was sworn in. He stated that the con- cerns of the neighbors is that of life-style. The people who live in this neighborhood live there for a reason, and they have chosen the area for its privacy and isolation from the "City". When the "City" comes to them, it both e rs them. Mr. DuBois stated that in the period of time he has resided in the Denver area, he has seen numerous condominium/townhouse developments throughout the area and noted that they are not "exciting" for thos e who live near them or drive through the areas. Mr. DuBois s tated that if th e residents of the adjacent and adjoining areas can have any eff ect on the overall development plan and development of the subjec t s ite , th ey wi ll do s o; i t i s no answe r to state that the land will be de- v e loped at a de n s ity far less than what it could be developed t o under the pres ent zoning law. Mr. DuB o is stated that zoning law is used only to determine the theortetical maximum density; factors such as traffic , water, parking , etc . all have an effect on the practical maximum density. He a s ked what is the "real maximum density" that could be developed on thi s s i t e ; he sugges ted that the r e al maximum density would be s omething l ess than the 29 0 un i ts that are proposed. Mr. DuBois stated that he f el t it coul d happen that the residents of the proposed development c ould d ecid e t h a t the animals kept by r e s i dent s o f the adj o ining res idential area are offens ive a nd a nuisan ce , a nd that complaint s could b e l o dged a ga inst th e peo ple who keep the a n imal s , He s tat e d that it ma y have no th i n g to do with the zoning, but whet her o r not t he anima l i s a "nuis anc e " becau se of noise , or whatever , and t ha t if e nough peo pl e ge t t oget he r the matter could end up in Court. Mr. DuBois asked whether the Plann ing Commission has a position on this issue, or at what point a concens us will be reached on the issue. He asked if this meeting is "where we get patted on the head and sent home." Do the adjacent/adjoining residents have a voice here. Mr. DuBois asked what the developer plans for the eastern end of the property . Mr. Du Bois stated that his residence is at #6 Sun set Lane and right against this property; the development will eliminate their view of the mou n tain s , and is a concern to the residents on Sun set La ne. He asked i f t h ere will be fence along the eastern portion of t h e developmen t , or will they have to be concerned about residents a nd pet s from the pro posed development cutting through their pro perty to reach a more convenient road. What restrictions and covenan ts will be requi r ed by the Planning Commission on the number of persons per dwelling un it , whether child ren will be allowed, the number of vehicles allowed , wh ether a n imals are per- mitted, etc. Mr. DuBois stated that as the Plann ed De v elopment is presently proposed h is definitely opposed to it, Mr. DuBois pointed out that while the proposed residential development may replace the use of the land by dirt-bikers, it could evolve into something much worse • • I • • - • • • • • -7- Mr. McBrayer stated that he would like to address the concern of density; he stated that members of the Commission and staff realize that it would be impossible to actually develop this site to the 1400 unit theoretical maximum because of the other requirements that have to be taken into con- sideration. Mr. McBrayer pointed out that the applicant is proposing a development less than would be permitted, and is still meeting the ordinance requirements. Mr. DuBois pointed out that Mr. McBrayer is still considering the zoning ordinance issue; there are other issues that have to be addressed, such as is there sufficient water to serve the proposed development. He again stated that he is of the opinion that the 290-unit density is the practical maximum density that can be put on this site. Mr. McBrayer stated that the Planned Development was referred to the Utilities Department, Traffic Engineer, State Highway Department, and their comments and suggestions have all been submitted for the record and incorporated into the staff report submitted to the Commission. Mr. McBrayer stated that the questions raised by Mr. DuBois have been addressed by the people with expertise in a given field and they have made recommendations regarding the Planned Development. Mr. DuBois asked what flexibility remains regarding the change in location of buildings; he is concerned about Buildings #18 and 19, those at the extreme east end of the development. Would the developer consider re- moving those structures completely, or lowering the height to one story and impose a greater setback. Mr. McBrayer called on Lynn Pederson; Ms. Pederson declined to speak to the Commission on the issue. Mr. McBrayer then called Ms. Lina Arn old; Ms. Arnold s tated that she was present only as an observer. Mr. McBrayer called on Mr. Max Arnold, who also stated he was present as an observer. Bob Howell, 5399 South Clarkson St r eet wa s sworn in. He asked if, when Mr. McBrayer cited percentages of open spac , lot coverage, etc., was this taking into account the Big Dry Cre k right-of-way. Mr. McBrayer again cited the comparison set forth in th staff report, and asked for clarification from Mr. Stitt. Mr. Stitt stated that 46% of the total site would be landscaped, or approximately 9.2 acres; this does include the Big Dry Creek easement. Mr. Howell then asked if usable open space included area devoted to parking. Mr. Stitt s tated that usable open space is defined as that area being free of structures; but it does not include areas used for surface parking. Mr. Howell pointed out that the City of Englewood is in court at the present time regarding the use of the water tower and water pressure , and questioned that there would be sufficient water pressure to develop and care for this proposed 290-unit residential development • Mr. DeWitt stated that the request for water be reviewed by the Utilities Department, and total development of 290 units may not occur pressure. Mr. DeWitt stated that this is in Department. taps and water service will that it is possible that the if there is insufficient the purview of the Utilities • I • • • • • • -8- Mr. Howell stated that he felt this i s serious criteria that sho uld be addressed before the applicant is given the right to proceed with the development. Ms. Josephine I psen, 5505 South Washington, was sworn in. She testified to the problems that she has experienced in being served with Englewood sewer service. Ms. Ipsen stated that she has a common boundary with the proposed development; if a large building is put right next to her property it would cut off her view, and would be right over her back yard. Mr. McBrayer pointed out that the applicant has testified that the height of the buildings will be under 40 feet. Ms. Ipsen stated that this height will eliminate the view for all of the residents along the development. Dr. Roy Lininger, #5 Sunset Lane, was sworn in. He stated that he was also representing the property owner at I ll Sunset Lane, Mr. Richard Shearer, who was unable to be at the meeting. Dr. Lininger stated that the issue of the ideal use of the land was rais ed, and that it was planned in the past that this would be developed for park and public purposes. He stated that he would hope prior to approval of this plan that the political entities would consider getting hold of this l and and put it t o its logical use --that o f park a nd o pen space . He stated that the proposed plan will have very high density abutting up against a rural area; he suggested that it would be bette r t o not have suc h a gre at contrast in the character of the two areas, and suggested that the min i mum the Planning Commission s houl d do i s to insist that the buil dings on the e a s t and north be l imi ted to one s tory in height, and setbacks b e i ncreased to equal those in Greenwood Vil l age or Littleton. Dr. Li n i nger s tated that he would like to rea d into t he record the following letter f rom Mr. Schearer. Planning Commission City of En g l ewood 3400 s . Elati Englewood CO 80110 "11 Sunset Lane Littleton, CO 80 121 February 20, 1 984 I am unable to attend the public hearing Feb. 22 on the 290 unit Planned Development behind Burt Chevrolet, as I will be out of town. Therefore, I wish to state my strong objections to the development as it is currently shown on the plans. We live at 11 Sunset Lane, Greenwood Village and the proposed development is west and south of us and adjoins our property. The plans show 25 ft. setbacks on all sides of the development in the vicinity of our neighbor- hood . This would put the nearest building on the develo pment, a three story condominium, approximately 50 ft. from our house. This would severely block our view of the mountains to the southwest and eliminate our backyard privacy . Bear in mind that the development is at about the same elevation as our adjoining properties at this location. In addition, the proposed location of the condominiums with only 25 ft. setbacks will make them highly visable to everyone living on or travelling on Sunset Lane. With three stories, they will visually impact everyone in this neighborhood • I • • - • • • • -9- I would request that the plans be modified to increase setback require- ments and reduce the building height at this end of the proposed develop- ment to reduce the detremental effects it will most certainly have on all of us in this neighborhood. I would appreciate it if this letter can be read at the public hearing. Sincerely, s/ Richard G. Shearer Richard G. Shearer" Mr. McBrayer stated that the staff has received a letter from the State Highway Department in response to the referral, which letter was received too late to include in the packet of information. Mr. McBrayer read into the record the letter from the State Highway Department. Susan T. King City of Englewood Planning Department 3400 s. Elati Street Englewood, Colo. 80110 RE: Case, Broadway Development Plan Dear Susan: "February 16, 1984 We have reviewed the plan sent to us and have the following comments. Noise impacts from adjacent arterials must be mitigated by developer. A signalized intersection at the proposed entrance will not be permitted unless the existing signal at Centennial is abandoned. The Big Dry Creek bridge will need to be widened to accommodate the acceleration-deceleration lane. Yours very truly, RICHARD J. BRASHER District Engineer s/ Neil McLeod RUSSELL W. PATE Maintenance Superintendent RWP/DB/cal cpy: Brasher/Bovee G. Prentiss S.H. 75 RF" Mr. McBrayer asked if there were any late-comers to the meeting who did not sign in but would like to address Lhe Commission • • I • - • • • • -10- Mr. Ron Kaylor, 5559 South Washington Street, was sworn in. Mr. Kaylor stated that those property owners appearing before him have demonstrated some of the concerns they have, but he questioned that it was proper to consider the issue of "down zoning" of the site. Mr. Kaylor noted that most of the concerns have dealt with the southeast corner of the site. Mr. Kaylor stated that he has had experience in real estate, and under- stands the density needs the developer must meet to make a project eco- nomical, and asked if possibly the developer could still meet the density needs of this project by increasing the density in another portion of the project, and decreasing the density in the southeast corner. Mr. Kaylor stated that he would request the Commission to discuss this possibility with the developer. Another consideration he felt would be worthwhile is the issue of solid fencing around the perimeter of the subject site; he stated that he did not know what is planned for play areas for children who might be living in the development, and pointed out that "people spread out to less confined areas, which would be the yards of the ad- jacent residents." Mr. Kaylor stated that he would ask that considera- tion be given to placing fencing along the areas of greatest concern, and stated that fencing and landscaping proposed would go a long way toward "noise and people abatement." Mr. Kaylor stated that one of the early concerns that was raised regarded traffic generated by this development; he noted that one of the parking areas on the proposed development plan lines up with an access way through the school property. He asked if this is planned as a future means of ingress/egress, or just coincidental. Mr. Kaylor then asked what the price range of the units will be. Mr. McBrayer asked Mr. Baer to come back to the podium. Mr. McBrayer asked Mr. Baer about the fencing vs. landscaping on the perimeter of the site; would the applicants be willing to install a fence on the perimeter of the site adjacent to the residential area in the County, Greenwood Village, and Littleton. Mr. Baer stated that the plans show just landscaping, and he is of the opinion that the applicants would prefer to not have a fence along the area; Mr. Baer did acknowledge that they have put up fences around other projects they have developed. Mr. McBrayer asked about covenants governing the development. Mr. Baer stated that this would be the by-laws of the Homeowners Association, and would be better answered by someone from CDM. Mr . McBrayer then inquired about the problem with sewer service that was c ited by an opponent. Mr. Baer stated that he would defer to Mr. Hallmark on this matter. Mr. McBrayer inquired about the pricing of the units. Mr. Baer deferred to Mr. Boyd on the pricing of the units. Mr. McBrayer noted that most of the opposition expressed appears to be on the southeast part of the proposed development, Buildings 18 and 19; he asked if there was any chance these buildings could be reduced in height to one and one-half stories. Mr. Baer stated that he did not think this could be done at thiR time, that it is not a "simple matter of taking a floor off". Mr. Baer discussed the density mix that they have proposed for the site, noting that the higher density condominium development bas been proposed closer to the commercial area of Burt Chevrolet and Target, while the lower density townbomes have been pro- posed along the residentially zoned abutting area. Hr. Baer stated that the condomintum11 and townhoaaea would be "for sale." • I • - • • • • • -11- Mr. McBraye r questioned the possibility of eliminating the buildings #1 8 and #19, and developing this area as a green area, or open space. Mr. Baer stated that it is the opinion of th e applicants that the pro- posed two story townhomes with a "residential flavor" wer e in keeping with th e abutting residential neighborhoods, and that the setbacks pro- posed by the applicants are very much in keeping with the setbacks in the adjacent neighborhoods. Mr. Baer stated that there have been meetings with the Planning staff for approximately one year to come up with the Planned Development, and the decisions on the density mix for the pro- ject were developed quite some time ago; he stated that he is not sure how well reducing the height of those buildings to one and one-half stories would fit into the overall plan. Mr. Carson noted that the school property is fenced, and the water tower property is also fenced; he asked if these fences are set right on th e property lines. Mr. Hallmark estimated that the fences are set in from the property lines two to three feet. Mr. Dale Boyd, 950 South Cherry, was sworn in. Mr. Boyd addressed the issue of covenants governing the development, and stated that these are documents which basically discipline the use of the land. He stated that this will be a "for sale" project; the by-laws would govern the behavior of the people living in the development. Mr. Boyd stated that the price ranges will vary from $50,000 to approximately $80,000; it will be a middle market project for this type of community. Mr. Boyd stated that the applicants have been led to believe that sewer service is adequate for the proposed development. Mr. Venard stated that he is concerned about the parking and storage of rec reational vehicles and asked if there is an ar e a pro po sed for this use. Mr. Boyd stated that residents of the deve lopment will be able t o park a trailer for no more than 72 hours on the sit e ; they must then find another location to park th e vehicle. He stated that they have no reason t o develop a long-range storag e lot for boats, trail e r s , etc., and do not plan to do so . Mrs. Becker stated that s h e does have concerns about play areas for children residing in the development; is there any planned play area for the c h ildren, or will children not be permitted in the development. Mr . Boyd stated there is no planned play area, but they generally put some area in; they have found in other communities they have developed there is a very low percentage of children . It has been their experience that if a young couple with small children are residing in the community, by the time the child reaches school age they usually move into a single-family residence. Mr. McBrayer asked if there was anyone else who wished to address the Commission. Mr. Marv Anderson, 5665 South Washington, was sworn in . Mr. Anderson suggested that unless there is an architectural barrier, people from the proposed development will seek access to Powers Avenue from the sub- ject site. He stated that he felt some thought must be given to "con- tainment" on the project. Mr. Anderson asked why more creative thought could not be given to a more gradual move from a low-density residential district to a higher density district such as is proposed. Mr . Anderson sugg sted that th applicants may call the $50,000 to $80,000 pricing of • I • • • • • • -12- the units in the middle range, but he does not and cited the cost of the adjoining homes in the $200,000+ range. Mr. Anderson stated that he would hope the height of the buildings adjacent to the residential area could be cut to one story, and that the developers would consider some- thing other than a townhouse/condominium development. Mr. McBrayer asked if anyone else wished to address the Commission, No one in the audience wished to address the Commission. Carson moved: Stoel seconded: The Public Hearing on Case #13-84 be closed. AYES: Venard, Barbre, Becker, Carson, Magnuson, McBrayer, Stoel, Tanguma NAYS: None ABSENT: Allen The motion carried. Mr. McBrayer asked the pleasure of the Commission. Mrs, Becker suggested that a motion might be made, with discussion to follow on the motion. Becker moved: Magnuson seconded: The Planning Commission recommend approval of The Broadway Planned Development, Case #13-84, with the following conditions: 1. Some areas of the drive lanes may need to be designated as "fire lanes" as determined by the Fire Marshal. 2. The proposed design of the water system for fire protection purposes must be submitted on blue- prints and approved prior to permit issuance for building construction. 3. The water system for this property must be de- signed to supply enough water to meet the required fire flow calculations (ISO) for the largest, most severely exposed structure in the development and must provide an adequate number of on-site fire hy- drants, as determined by the Fire Chief. (Section 10-30l(c), 1982 Uniform Fire Code.) 4, All fire hydrants and access roads must be usable immediately prior to and during any construction in- volving combustible materials. (Section 10-JOl(d), 1982 Uniform Fire Code,) 5. All streets are to be built to City standards. 6. The South Broadway/Big Dry Creek bridge should be widened with adequate acceleration and deceleration lanes and a center storage lane for southbound traffic exiting from site, 7. The street providing access to the site should be named as per metro area grid system • • I • • - • • • - -13- 8. Egress from the site may be limited to right- turn o nly if the number of accidents increase at this intersection. 9. The 100-foot drainage easement should be expanded, where necessary, to include the entire Big Dry Creek channel to the top of the bank . 10. A maintenance access right across the private drives and parking lots as well as two ramps from the top of the bank to the channel bottom should be provided to the Urban Drainage District. 11. The 100-year flood plain limit should be shown on the Development Plan . The flood plain exceeds the channel limits at the south end of the property and should be so documented. 12. Initial maintenance responsibility for the channel mu st be established. 13. Urban Drainage and Flood Control must approve de- sign plans for any flood control facilities to be con- structed if the facilities are to be eligible for Dis- trict maintenance assistance. Mr. Carson stated that he felt some serious consideration is needed on this proposal; namely, that some kind of fencing in the southeast corner of the project be required. Mrs. Becker stated that she would be willing to add the provision of a fence to the conditions to be met by the develop- er with the approval of the second. She stated that it did appear to her that the concern with a fence around the site was more with "containment" and not with aesthetics. 14. Fencing in addition t o the proposed landscaping shall be installed in the southeast portion of the proposed development. Mrs. Becker stated that it appears to her that the people who have spoken before the Commission have had an opportunity to purchase the property if they wanted to preserve their view, and to provide the open space they want in the area. Ms. Becker stated she would suggest that if, up to the point where this property has been purchased by the applicant s, the governmental agencies have not taken steps to develop the site for open space, that it will not be done by the governmental agencies. Mrs. Becker questioned that it might be inappropriate for the Commission to recommend that the structures on the east end of the development be lowered in height or removed. Mrs. Becker stated that she does appreciate the fact that the applicant has reduced the density of the proposal from the maximum that could be permitted, but is also aware that an additional 500 people on this site seems like a lot to the adjoining property owners. Mrs. Becker suggested there would not need to be open space on the site for the total population of the development at the same time. Regarding the matter of renter vs. owner, she questioned that the Commission has any right making such a stipulation that a property owner cannot rent a unit if he so desires. Mrs. Becker stated that she does empathize with the opponents who fear the imposition of a large building right next to • I • • • • • • -14- their home, but pointed out that the applicant is providing a 25 foot set- back from his property line. She stated that she would vote in favor of the motion. Mr. McBrayer stated that the property is zoned R-3, High Density Residence, and he sees the intended use as a buffer between the low-density residential development to the east, and the commercial development along South Broadway. Mr. McBrayer stated that this land will not develop as R-1 property. Mr. McBrayer stated that the ordinances are written to provide a break between the low-density single-family areas and the high intensity commercial and industrial developments, by imposing higher density residential developments in between. Mr. McBrayer stated that in general, he is in favor of the plan; however, since most of the opposition is to the southeast corner of the site, it appears that this small area could be better left in land- scaping, and the units proposed for this area on the Plan could be in- corporated in enlarged buildings elsewhere on the site. Mr. McBrayer stated that he is of the opinion it would be an oversight on the part of the Commission to not try to address the concerns of the property owners who will be only 25 feet from the proposed structures. Mr . McBrayer stated that he would like to try to talk the applicants into "jockying" the units around to leave the southeast corner open for green area. Mr. Tanguma stated that he would agree with Mr. McBrayer's sentiments, and suggested that with a little realignment of some of the structures, he felt maybe the neighborhood adjoining the site could be helped. Mr. Tanguma stated that he likes the concept of the development, but if the Commission and applicant could help the neighbors by lowering the impact of the two buildings on the southeast part of the site, they should do so. Mr. Stoel stated that he felt most of the concern that was registered by the opponents was that the "buildings were being shoved against their property line"; he suggested that the developer should take into considera- tion what was said at this meeting, and readjust the plan accordingly. Mr. Tanguma asked why the change in the requirements of the Fire Depart- ment from two access routes to approval of one point of access. Mrs. Romans stated that this is a lower intensity use that was proposed in previous proposals. Both the Fire Chief and Fire Marshal are of the opinion that the one point of access is adequate. Mrs. Becker asked whether it is within the right of the Planning Commission to ask the applicant to change the Plan. Mr. DeWitt suggested that the Commission should refer to the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance and review it to clarify the duty of the Commission. Mrs. Becker stated that she would reword her question: Has the Commission the right to say to the applicant that the Plan cannot be approved unless he will move some of the buildings from where they are proposed, or to say that the applicant may or may not have approval of the Planned Development based on the plan as presented. Mr. DeWitt asked if the Commission was talking about removal of the two buildings. Mrs. Becker stated that it is a "rearrange- ment" of the units into other areas of the site. Mr. DeWitt stated that he felt the Commission had this right; the applicant may appeal the deter- mination of the Planning Commission to the City Council, and that the City Council does make the final determination on any Planned Development • • I • • • • • • • • • -15- Mr. McBrayer called for the vote on the motion, as amended with the ad- dition of #14 regarding the construction of a fence along the southeast portion of the subject site. AYES: Barbre, Becker, Carson, Magnuson, Venard NAYS: McBrayer, Stoel, Tanguma ABSENT: Allen The motion carried. Mr. McBrayer thanked members of the audience for their attendance and comments, and declared a recess of the Commission at 9:00 P. M. * * * * * The meeting reconvened at 9:10 P. M., with the following members present: Barbre, Becker, Carson, Magnuson, McBrayer, Stoel, Tanguma, Venard. Mr. Allen was absent. IV. SUBDIVISION WAIVER The Broadway * * * * * CASE #14-84 Mr. McBrayer stated that this matter before the Commission is a request for a waiver to the Subdivision Regulations by the developers of The Broadway Planned Development. He noted that the staff report was sub- mitted to the Commission for their perusal, and asked if there were any questions of the staff. Mr. McBrayer asked if the staff had anything to add to the staff report. Mrs. Romans stated that if a property is to be developed under the Planned Development guidelines, a subdivision has not been required; the staff does support the granting of a waiver to the Subdivision Regulations. Mr. McBrayer asked if there was dress this issue. No one spoke any one in the audience who wanted regarding the Subdivision Waiver. to ad- Becker moved: Carson seconded: The Planning Commission appro ve th e reques t o f Mr. Kal Zeff and a waiver to the Subdivision Regulations be granted. AYES: Becker, Carson, Magnuson, McBray e r, Stoel, Tanguma, Venard, Barbre NAYS: None ABSENT: Allen The motion carried. City Attorney DeWitt excused himself from the meeting. V. DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT PLAN Proposed Amendments CASE 1115-84 Ms. Powers stated that two years ago, the Commission considered the Downtown Redevelopment Plan (Urban Renewal Plan) to determine whether it was in complianc e with th e Comprehensive Plan of the City. It was • I • • n • • • • -16- determined that the Downtown Redevelopment Plan did comply with the Com- prehensive Plan, and it was recommended to the City Council and adopted in August, 1982 by Resolution No. 39, Series of 1982. The redevelopment plan proposed by Brady Corporation has changed considerably from that which was proposed in 1982, and the Downtown Redevelopment Plan has been proposed for amendment to more accurately reflect the current redevelop- ment proposed. Ms. Powers reviewed the changes in the proposed redevelop- ment, most notable of which is the change from the Girard "Mall" to the Girard/South Cherokee (Civic Center Boulevard) concept. The Urban Renewal Authority has referred the proposed amendments to the City Council, which body has, in turn, referred the proposed amendments to the Planning Com- mission to determine whether the amendments will still cause the Plan to comply with the general Comprehensive Plan of the City of Englewood. One of the amendments pointed out by Ms. Powers is the expanded list of prop- erties to be acquired by the Urban Renewal Authority to facilitate the public improvements needed along Little Dry Creek in the downtown area. Ms. Powers stated that if the Planning Commission determines that the amended Downtown Redevelopment Plan does comply with the general Compre- hensive Plan, a proposed resolution has been prepared for the Commission's action; this will be referred to the City Council for a Public Hearing on March 19th. Ms. Powers stated that the City Council has asked staff to make contact with the property owners on Acoma to determine whether or not they do in fact, want their properties listed for acquisition by the Urban Renewal Authority. Carson moved: Becker seconded: The Planning Commission approve Resolution #1, Series of 1984, A RESOLUTION OF THE ENGLEWOOD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGARDING CONSISTENCY OF THE AMENDED DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT PLAN WITH THE GENERAL PLAN OF THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, and refer the matter to City Council for their approval. AYES: Carson, .Magnuson, McBrayer, Stoel, Tanguma, Venard, Barbre, Becker NAYS: No ne ABSENT: Allen The motion carried. VI. FINDINGS OF FACT I-2, General Industrial Sign Code, §22.7 Design Guidelines, §22.4C Case #10-84 Case 1111-84 Case #12-84 Mr. McBrayer stated that Findings of Fact on amendments to the I-2, General Industrial District, 122.7, Sign Code, §22.4 C Design Guidelines, were to be considered for approval. Barbre moved: Stoel seconded: The Findings of Fact on Case 1110-84 amendments to the I-2 General Industrial District, be approved as written • • I • ' • • • • -17- AYES: Magnuson, McBrayer, Stoel, Tanguma, Venard, Barbre, Becker, Carson NAYS: None ABSENT: Allen The motion carried. Carson moved: Stoel seconded: The Findings of Fact on Case #11-84, amendments to §22.7 of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, Sign Code, be approved as written. AYES: McBrayer, Stoel, Tanguma, Venard, Barbre, Becker, Carson, Magnuson NAYS: None ABSENT: Allen The motion carried. Venard moved: Stoel seconded: The Findings of Fact on Case #12-84, amendment of §22.4 C of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, De- sign Guidelines, be approved as written. AYES: Stoel, Tanguma, Venard, Barbre, Becker, Carson, Magnuson, McBrayer NAYS: None ABSENT: Allen The motion carried. VII . I-1 ZONE DISTRICT §22 .4-12 CASE I/9-84B Mr . McBrayer stated that the revised I-1 Zone District amendments in- corporating the mobile home parks as a permitted use and design standards for the mobile home park have been prepared by the staff. He asked if the Commission had any revisions or comments to the proposed zone amend- ments. Mr. Stoel asked if anyone in the I-1 Zone District could apply for a mobile home park. Mrs. Romans stated that if the property in question met the standards set forth for the development of a mobile home park they could apply for a permit for a mobile home park. Mr . McBrayer suggested that the Commission needs to set a date for a public hearing on the proposed amendment, and sugges ted that March 20 be scheduled for this Hearing. Mr. Stoel asked if WHERE had reviewed the proposed guidelines. Mrs. Romans stated that representatives of WHERE have indicated to her they are in favor of the ordinance with the proposed guidelines incorporated. They have indicated that they would like the density increased to 10 - 12 units per acre. However, Mrs. Romans stated, she did considerable research several years ago when drafting the proposed standards, and the eight units per acre was the acceptable standard for a mobile home park density; she stated that she would not recommend an increase in the number of units per acre • • I • • - • • • • -18- VIII. PUBLIC FORtiN. Mr. McBrayer asked if anyone in the audience wished to address the Com- mission. No one in the audience addressed the Commission at this time. IX. DIRECTOR'S CHOICE. Mrs. Romans stated that during the recess of the Commission she had some discussion with Mr. Boyd of CDM, and he indicated that he would be willing to have his architect look at the plan to see if an adjustment can be made in the density/development of the southeast corner of The Broadway site. Mrs. Romans stated that the APA Conference will be May 5 -9 in Minneapolis- St. Paul, and suggested that members of the Commission should begin con-sidering who they will designate to attend. The Annual Banquet sponsored by Denver Regional Council of Governments will be on March 28 at the Regency Inn. Members of the Commission who want to attend should notify the staff so that reservations may be made. The City will pay for the attendance of the Commission member; guests of the Commissioner will be at the expense of the Commission member. Mr. Carson requested that two reservations be made for him to attend the DRCOG Banquet. X. COMMISSIONER'S CHOICE. Mr. Stoel stated that he would like to move that Mrs. Becker be designated to attend the APA Conference in Minneapolis/St. Paul. Mr. Carson stated he would second the motion. Mr. Tanguma stated that he wanted more than one Commission member to go to this conference. He stated that there are so many different meetings going on at the same time, that the Commission member cannot possibly get all the information available. Mrs. Becker stated that he would agree that it would be beneficial for more than one Commission member t o attend the conference. Mr. McBrayer stated that he would be in terest ed in attending, and would be willing to pay his own way to the conference, if there are sufficient funds to provide registration for him in addition to Mrs. Becker's ex- penses. Ms . Powers stated that the staff would look at the budget. It was the concensus of the Commission that Mrs . Becker be designated to attend the APA Conference in May. Mr. McBrayer stated that at the time of his interview with the City Council prior to his reappointment, one of the matters discussed was the fact that City Council would like to look at matters being considered by the Com- mission prior to being put in final form for their consideration. If they are against the concept of something the Commission is considering, it would make no sense to proceed on this particular project. Mr. McBrayer stated that there is concern about the amount of staff time spent on typing and retyping materials. Mr. McBrayer presented Commission members with a proposed revised procedure to follow on items to be referred to the City Council. Under the proposed procedure, a summa ry of the changes • I • - ' • • • • • • -19- under consideration by the Commission would be sent to the Council and their input would be available before further work was done on the matter. Discussion ensued. Mrs. Becker asked if there was anything on procedures t o be followed that is set out in the Charter that might be in conflict with the proposal. Also, would the summary be referred to the legal de- partment so that input from the City Attorney would be available early on . Mr. Tanguma stated that he would not want to be "influenced" by City Council by having their input prior to Commission consideration. Dis- cussion ensued. Mr. Tanguma stated that he felt there was a need to receive input from the public before City Council consideration. Mr. McBrayer suggested that the Commission members study his proposal, and maybe some way can be devised that will be workable, and yet not deny public input or lead to "influence" by City Council. Mr. Carson stated that he knows that City Council wants to know what we are doing right from the first. If they have comments about a pro- ject the Commission is working on, they should let the Commission know. Mr. McBrayer stated that the meeting on March 6 has been scheduled as a work session on the goals and work program of the Commission for the ensuing year. He presented members with a suggested format that might be followed in devising the goals. It was suggested that this work session begin at 5:30P.M., and that sandwiches be served • Mr. McBrayer stated that one of the goals of the previous year that was not completed was to review the Comprehensive Plan. He stated that he has designated this as a project for this year, and discussed the possi- ble procedure to be followed in the review. Mrs. Becker stated that she would like to discuss the role she has assumed with the APA Colorado Chapter; she stated that she finds the meetings very interesting, and that Susan King of our staff is a member of the Board. Mr. McBrayer inquired about a second meeting or an adjustment on the meeting date with the City Council. Ms. Powers stated that the Community Development Department staffs four boards and commissions, and it may be possible to switch dates. She would look into this. Mr. Carson asked when a Planned Development will be coming in on the Fairgrounds. Ms. Powers stated that the property owners are still trying to work out the zoning; the property is within the City limits of Engle-wood, however. The meeting adjourned at 10:00 P. M. • I • • - ' • • • • CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution No. ____ ~l~- Series of 1984 A RESOLUTION OF THE ENGLEWOOD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGARDING CONSISTENCY OF THE AMENDED DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT PLAN WITH THE GENERAL PLAN OF THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD. WHEREAS, a Downtown Redevelopment Plan has been prepared by the Englewood Urban Renewal Authority; and WHEREAS, the Downtown Redevelopment Plan was amended by the Urban Renewal Authority on February 8, 1984; and WHEREAS, the City Council has submitted the Downtown Redevelopment Plan to the Englewood Planning and Zoning Commission for review and recommenda- tions as to its conformity with the General Plan for the development of the municipality as a whole in accordance with Section 31-25-107(2) C.R.S. 1973, as amended; and WHEREAS, a review has been conducted by the Englewood Planning and Zoning Commission. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning and Zoning Com-mission of the City of Englewood, Colorado: ATTEST: Section 1: That the Downtown Redevelopment Plan, as amended, has been determined to be in conformity with the Gene ral Plan of de- velopment for the City of Englewood. ADOPTED AND APPROVED THIS ___ 2_2_nd __ day of ___ F_e_b_r_ua_ry..:_ ______ , 1984. Chairman I • • • • • • MEMORANDUM ~ cl TO: Mayor and Members of City Council FROM: Mayor Pro Tem Bradshaw Councilman Joe Bilo Councilman John Neal City Manager Andy McCown DATE: March 12, 1984 SUBJECT: NLC/CONGRESSIONAL CITY CONFERENCE The annual NLC/Congressional City Conference was held in Washington, D.c., March 3-6. Attending on behalf of the City of Englewood were Mayor Pro Tem Beverly Bradshaw (committee meetings through Sunday only), Councilmembers Joe Silo and John Neal, and City Manager Andy McCown. The conference followed its usual format of pre-conference seminars on Saturday, committee meetings open to the general membership through Sunday, general sessions on Monday, and meetings with Congressional representatives and staffs on Tuesday. Mayor Pro Tem Bradshaw attended meetings of the Policy and Steering Committee on Human Development, serving as Chairman of one of the sub-committees. The major event was the appearance of President Reagan. We were fortunate enough to get front row seats for his speech. As expected in an election year, there was a great deal of partisan rhetoric being expressed at many of the sessions. This is somewhat disconcerting as it tends to dilute focus- ing in on the major issues and reaching a meaningful con- sensus to resolve these issues. By far, the topic of most interest to Englewood were the discussions on H. R. 4170 -the $50 billion omnibus tax bill. This is important to Englewood in respect to its proposed limitation on the issuance of Industrial Development Bonds and the effect this may have on our downtown development plans. From our discussions with various federal officials, it does appear that a cap in the area of $150-$200 per capita will be approved. Attached are several information items relative to H. R. 4170 and also a position paper on the priorities for cities in 1984 as approved by the NLC Board of Directors. We sincerely appreciate City Council allowing us to attend this meeting. It is a very helpful session in helping us to • I • • ,, • • • • Page 2 March 12, 1984 keep up with federal legislation as it affects our communities. By the way, this was a landmark meeting since the City Manager actually attended a meeting in Washington and did not get sick! ~If,~~ .... BEVERLY J. BRADSHAW )~._, If. ~~,£_ '-aOHN D. NEAL ~~~~&. vdu~ ///c{:~,'7t- AND~MccoWN pc I • • ...,"' · In (1 • • • • NATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES LEGISLATIVE WORKSHOP ON FEDERAL TAX POLICY MARCH 5 I 1984 With annual federal deficits projected at $200 billion and higher over the next few years, Congress and the Administration are considering legislation to raise additional revenues. Pending in the House and Senate are bills affecting such key city interests as industrial development bonds, mortgage revenue bonds, and lease financing. At the same time, the Treasury Department is scheduled to submit a proposal to the President for an overhaul of the current tax system in December. Any such overhaul could well affect the municipal bond market and the deductibility of local taxes. Background In 1983 Congress devoted considerable time and effort to restrict the use of industrial development bonds, sale-leaseback financing, traditional leasing, and municipal service contracts. These efforts were undertaken in closed sessions. As reported, and as endorsed in President Reagan's Fiscal 1985 budget request, the leasing restrictions in S. 2062 and H.R. 4170 are projected to increase federal revenues by about $8.l"hillion over three years. The IDB restrictions requested by the administration and in the pending House bill H.R. 4170 are projected to increase revenues by about $1.4 billion. On a 214-204 vote, the House on November 17, 1983 rejected the rule permitting consideration and of the omnibus tax bill, H.R. 4170. The rejection of the rule--which would have prohibited any amendments to the leasing or IDB restrictions--foreclosed action until this session of Congress. The Senate adjourned without acting on either its municipal leasing restrictions (S. 2062) or its deficit reduction measures. The Congressional failure to act meant that the authority for cities to issue single family mortgage revenue bonds (MRB's) expired on December 31, that IDB's issued after December 31st were put under a cloud, and that municipal leasing and service contracts entered into after May 23, 1983 were either prohibited or made subject to higher costs. Unlike most legislation, tax legislation may have a significant impact even though not enacted. By including retroactive dates, municipal bond counsels are unable to give unqualified opinions as to whether the financial instrument will be tax exempt to the owner or purchaser. Consequently, even though Congress did not complete action on its tax bills in 1983, the pending bills have the effect of law unless and until Congress acts • • I • • ,, • • • .. -2- • lOB's. H.R. 4170 would place a $150 per capita state- by-state volume cap on all private purpose lOB's except 50l(c) (3) health, education, and multifamily housing bonds. Half of each state's issuing authority would be allocated to local issuers on a per capita basis, subject to changes made by states, with a s~ecial allocation required for home rule cities. The bill would also place the following restrictions on lOB's: (l) deny accelerated cost recovery for sewage or solid waste facilities, air pollution control facilities, and projects supported by UDAG grants where the property is placed in service after December 31, 1983 and the property is financed with bonds issued after October 18, 1983; (2) prohibit use of lOB's where more than 25 percent of bond proceeds are for acquisition of land; (3) prohibit lOB financing for purchase of existing facilities unless at least 15 percent of bond proceeds are used for rehabilitation; (4) prohibit issuance of •small issue• lOB's when the principal user would have more than $40 million in issues outstanding; (5) deny tax exemption for lOB's issued with federal guarantees (except for FHA, VA, FNMA, FHLMC, GNMA, Federal Reserve Bank and public housing financing); (6) apply •small issue• lOB limits to entire projects; (7) apply current mortgage bond arbitrage restrictions to all lOB's (except as modified for multifamily housing bonds); and (8) prohibit use of lOB's to finance liquor stores, sky boxes in sports facilities, private airplanes, and gambling establishments. Except for the first provision, these new lOB restrictions would be retro- active to all bonds issued after December 31, 1983. • Sale Leaseback, Leasing and Service Contracts (H.R. 4170, S. 2062). Both House and Senate bills would affect sale leasebacks and leasing as follows: (1) for new construction projects, they continue existing tax benefits if construction is not financed by a tax-exempt bond and if a true lease is involved; (2) for substantial rehabilitation, the House bill continues the rehab tax credit if rehabilitation is not financed by a tax exempt bond; the Senate bill does not; (3) for existing structures, they deny accelerated depreciation to owners of the structure involved in a sale leaseback; (4) for real property leasing, they deny accelerated depreciation where more than half of the space is leased to tax exempt entities; (5) for equipment leased to cities, they deny accelerated depreciation to the owners; (6) private providers of municipal services would lose both accelerated depreciation and investment tax credit benefits, thereby substantially increasing their service costs; and (7) they provide limited exceptions for wastewater and resource recovery plants • • I • • ,, • • • • -3- Issues For cities, the tax proposals would significantly increase the cost of providing municipal services, building or rebuilding their infrastructure, and directing economic development. At a time of significantly increased local fiscal responsibilities and decreased direct federal assistance, should Congress and the administration focus tax increases so exclusively on municipal areas of responsibility? Are the leasing restrictions biased against the public sector7 do they go well beyond curbing perceived abuses? Are the IDB volume caps equitable and administratively workable? What is the impact of IDS restrictions on traditional public purposes? NLC Position NLC opposes administration efforts to terminate municipal authority to issue mortgage bonds7 administration and House efforts to impose a state-controlled volume cap on city authority to issue IDS's7 House efforts to restrict IDS's for traditional public purposes7 and administration and Congressional proposals to sharply restrict tax benefits for traditional municipal leasing and service contract practices. NLC supports reauthorization of authority for cities to issue mortgage revenue bonds to provide shelter for low income persons; supports restricting the practice of selling or trading tax benefits where no new investment is involved7 and supports restricting the use of private purpose IDS's to distressed areas and to areas designated by local officials for industrial use or revitalization. • I • • - • • ,, • • • • -4- SENATE FINANCE COMMITTEE Majority Robert Dole (R-KS), Chairman Bob Packwood (R-OR) William V. Roth, Jr. (R-DE) John C. Danforth (R-MO) John H. Chafee (R-RI) John Heinz (R-PA) Malcolm Wallop (R-WY) Dave Durenberger (R-MN) William L. Armstrong (R-CO) Steven D. Symms (R-ID) Charles E. Grassley (R-IA) Minority Russell B. Long (D-LA), Ranking Minority Member Lloyd Bentsen (D~TX) Spark M. Matsunaga (D-BI) Daniel Patrick Moynihan (D-NY) Max Baucus (D-MT) David L. Boren (D-OK) Bill Bradley (D-NJ) George J. Mitchell (D-ME) David Pryor (D-AR) BOUSE WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE Majority Dan Rostenkowski (D-IL) , Chairman Sam Gibbons (O-IL) J. J. Pickle (D-TX) Charles B. Rangel (D-NY) Fortney H. Stark (D-cA) James R. Jones (D-OK) Andrew Jacobs, Jr. (D-IN) Harold E. Ford (D-TN) Ed Jenkins (D-GA) Richard A. Gephardt (D-MO) Thomas J. Downey (D-NY) Cecil Heftel (D-HI) Wyche Fowler, Jr. (D-GA) Frank J. Guarini (D-NJ) James M. Shannon (D-MA) Marty Russo (D-IL) Donald J. Pease (D-OH) Kent Hance (D-TX) Robert T. Matsui (D-CA) Beryl F. Anthony, Jr. (D-AR) Ronnie G. Flippo (D-AL) Byron L. Dorgan (D-ND) Barbara B. Kennelly (O-CT) Minority Barber B. Conable, Jr. (R-NY), Ranking Minority Member John J. Duncan (R-TN) Bill Archer (R-TX) Guy Vander Jagt (R-MI) Philip M. Crane (R-IL) Bill Frenzel (R-MN) James G. Martin (R-NC) Richard T. Schulze (R-PA) Willis D. Gradison, Jr. (R-OB) w. Benson Moore (R-LA) Carroll A. Campbell, Jr. (R-SC) William M. Thomas (R-cA) I • • - • • • • • ADDENDUM TO HANDOUT ON FEDERAL LEGISLATION ON TAXES 1. House. On Thursday, March 1, the House Nays and Means r.ommi. t-t-~e re-reported H.R. 4170, its $50 billion omnibus tax bill. As adopted, the bill would make the following changes from the tax legislative handout: (a) Mortgage Revenue Bonds (MRBs) The bill would renew for five years the authority for cities and states to issue single family mortgage revenue bonds, or, to issue mortgage credit certificates; {b) Industrial Development Bonds (IDBs) -- The bill is still retroactive to December 31, 1983, or earlier. The one major change made by the tax committee was to broaden the exemption from the volume cap to include publicly owned convention and trade facilities, and airport, port, parking and mass transit facilities; {c) Sale-leaseback, Leasing, and Contracting Out -- no changes were made; (d) Heavy Truck Taxes -- The committee reduced the excise tax on heavy trucks from $1600 to $500. To compensate, it increased the federal excise tax on diesel fuel from $.09 to $.145. The impact on the federal Highway Trust Fund is in dispute, with some transportation groups apprehensive that this change will reduce trust fund revenues by about $300 million annually; {e) Tax Freezes -- The committee added prov~s~ons projected to increase federal tax revenues by $21.8 billion. The proposal would delay the start of, repeal, or modify several existing tax provisions scheduled to reduce federal taxes. Included would be taxes affecting: interest exclusions, cigarettes and liquor taxes, telephone taxes, safe harbor leasing, estate and gift taxes, and windfall profit taxes; (f) Loopholes -- The committee agreed to approximate l y $12.5 billion in tax shelters, accounting, and corporate tax changes as recommended by the administration • • I • • - • • • • II PRIORITIES FOR AMERICA'S CITIES -1 984 I . Insuring Economic Recovery To i nsure continued economic recovery and city abil i ty to f i nance governmental activ i ties at reasonable interest rates, NLC recom- mends enactment of a substantial and balanced def i cit reduction p ackage in 1984, through consideration of: (1) restraints on growth of non-means-tested entitle- ments by changing indexing mechanisms to lowe r o f CPI or wage index, or providing cost-of -living adjustments below the full i ncrease in the CPI; (2) significant reductions in growth of defense spenaing to no more than five p ercent i n real growth annually; and (3 ) i ncreased revenues through such means as delay i n indexing, a temporary income tax surcha r ge or energy tax , and repeal and/or modification of va r i- ous tax expenditures. NLC opposes, in any deficit reduct i on package, further fund i n g reductions in such means-tested programs as medicaid, AFDC, SSI, low-income fuel aid, and housing and major discretionary programs that benefit p eop le who live in cities. These programs have been hel a be l ow i nflat i on-adjusted levels dur i ng the past th r ee y ea rs . NLC rea ffir ms its oppos i tion to a const i tutional amendment to manda te a ba l anced Federal budget and o p poses a c onst i t u t i ona l am e n am en t to p rov i de f o r a l i n e item veto o f spend i ng b ills. The fi r st is u nwork a ble; t he second wo uld shift too mu ch power fr om Congress t o the P resid ent . II. FY 1985 Budg et (1) Tax Priorities NLC opposes efforts to end city authority to issue mortgage revenue bonds; to restrain use of industrial development bonds through state caps; and to sharply restrict tax benefits for traditional city leasing practices. We recommend extending issuing authority for mortgage revenue bonds; restricting use of private ~:-urpose industrial developme n t bonds to those in dis- tressed areas and areas targeted by local officials for indus- trial use; and exempting from new leasing rules projects involv- ing new or substantially-rehabilitated property , equipment, and service contracts. We support extension of the Targeted Job Tax Credit . • I • • 'I • • • • Page 2 (2) Spending Priorities NLC supports Administration requests for full funding of General Revenue Sharing, Community Develo~ment Block Grant, Urban Develop- ment Action Grant, employment training, and wastewater treatment plants and increases in "superfund", highways, and airport grants. In addition, we support a $60 million sup~lemental appropriation for shelter for the homeless. We oppose cuts in (a) housing ($3.6 billion ~roposed cuts from FY 84 levels) (b) Economic Development Administration ($218 million proposed cuts from FY 84 level, due to proposed termination of program), (c) summer youth ($100 million from FY 84 level), and (d) mass transit operating assistance ($329 million from FY 84 level) • (e) energy conservation programs ($34 million for state energy conservatin and energy extension service programs from FY 84 levels) NLC further op~ses proposed cuts of $2.1 billion below current service levels in medicaid, food stamps, and AFDC. III. Legislative Priorities NLC su~~rts enactment of (1) cable legislation that preserves city authority to regulate subscriber rates for basic services; to require adequate public, educational, governmental and leased access channels; to ensure a competitive renewal k'rocess; to establish franchise fees; to own and operate cable systems; and to enforce existing franchise commitments; (2) antitrust liability legislation that exempts cities from liability under federal antitrust laws on same basis as states under Parker v. Brown and subse- quent court decisions; • I • • - • • • • • Page 3 • • (3) fair housing enforcement legislation that strength- ens administrative enforcement of antidiscrimina- tion laws unaer the Fair Housing Act of 1968; (4) comprehensive infrastructure legislation that includes a taxable bond option for essential infra- structure ~rojects; supplemental grants for essen- tial public facilities for cities suffering from fiscal stress; annual evaluation of existing federal infrastructure programs to improve effec- tiveness; and an annual federal capital investment budget; (5) urban enterprise zone legislation to demonstrate the value of tax and regulatory relief in rebuild- ing distressed areas and creating jobs for low income residents of such areas; (6) environmental le3islation that affirms the national comm1tment to re uce and control pollution (through reauthorization of the clean air, clean water, and resource conservation and recovery acts); and, specifically, clean water legislation that assures cities adequate resources to meet the clean-up requirements by the Federal government on publicly- owned treatment works; and (7) specific direct programs for job creation to reduce unemployment, especially among the disadvantaged and dislocated workers. IV. The President's Five-Year Domestic Plan NLC strongly opposes the President's 5-year budget proposal for a "decaae-long domestic real spending freeze." If adopted, it would further shift costs to state and localities and retreat from long- established Federal res~onsibilities in numerous areas, including those recognized by the President as part of the national "safety- net." Such a radical departure from current policies should not be undertaken • • I • • • • • • C 0 U N C I L C 0 M M U N I C A T I 0 N DATE AGENDA ITEM SUBJECT March 13, 1984 U>A The Broadway Planned Development 1 N 1 T 1 ATED BY City Planning and Zoning Commission ACTION PROPOSED Receive and review the recommendation of the City Planning and Zoning Commission. It should be noted that as a result of the testimony entered into the record of the Public Hearing, the developer has modified the Development Plan in an effort to address concerns of adjacent property owners. It is the opinion of the City Attorney that this Plan may be r e ferred to the City Council without the recom- mendation of the Commission. The City Council may wish to consider the original Plan or the revised Plan at a Public Hearing. BACKGROUND. An application for a Planned Development was filed by Kal Zeff with the Department of Community Dev e lopment on January 19, 1984. It concerns the property to the south of the water tower, and is in the immediate vicinity of 5200 South Broadway, south of Burt Chevrolet, north and east of the Target Store and to the east of Big Dry Creek. The property is zoned R-3, High Density Residence. The proposed development would contain 24 buildings with a mix o f condominiums an d town homes totaling 290 dwelling units. The Comm ission, in making their determination at a Public Hearing on February 22, 1984, considered building location, traffic circula tion, off-street parking, landscaping , open space and overall design. It was determined that the development is in compliance with the R-3 zoning requirements. Testimony was received from representatives of COM, the architectural firm designing the project, the developer, and the Planning staff. Nine persons from the adjacent area also gave testimony in opposition to the development . The issues raised by the adjacent property owners are as follows: 1. Density. 2 . Buffering the development at the east and south side of the property with fencing and landscaping. 3. Traffic along Clarkson. (This is an existing condition due to the Broadway/Belle- view intersection.) 4. Height of buildings numbered 18 and 19. 5. Setbacks of buildings numbered 18 and 19. The City Planning Commission approved the Broadway Planned Development subject to the following conditions: • I • • - • r • • • • -2- 1. Some areas of the drive lanes may need to be designated as "fire lanes" as deter- mined by the Fire Marshal. 2. The proposed design of the water system for fire protection purposes must be s ub- mitted on blue~rint s and approved prior to permit issuance for building construc- tion. 3. The water system for this property must be designed to supply enough water to meet the required fire flow calculations (ISO) for the largest, most severely exposed structure in the development and must provide an adequate number of on-site fire hydrants, as determined by the Fire Chief. (Section 10-30l(c), 1982 Uniform Fire Code.) 4. All fire hydrants and access roads must be usable immediately prior to and during any construction involving combustible materials. (Section 10-30l(d), 1982 Uniform Fire Code.) 5. All streets are to be built to City standards. 6. The South Broadway/Big Dry Creek bridge should be widened with adequate accelera- tion and deceleration lanes and a center storage lane for southbound traffic exiting from site. 7. The street providing access to the site should be named as per metro area grid system. B. Egress from the site may be limited to right turn only if the number of accidents increase at this intersection. 9. The 100-foot drainage easement should be expanded, where necessary, to include the entire Big Dry Creek channel to the top of the bank. 10 . A maintenance access right across the private drives and parking lots as well as two ramps from the top of the bank to the channel bottom should be provided to the Urban Drainage District. 11. The 100-year flood plain limit should be shown on the Development Plan. The flood plain exceeds the channel limits at the south end of the property and should be so documented. 12. Initial maintenance responsibility for the channel must be established. 13. Urban Drainage and Flood Control must approve design plans for any flood control facilities to be constructed if the facilities are to be eligible for District maintenance assistance • 14. Fencing in addition to the proposed landscaping shall be installed in the south- east portion of the proposed development. SUBSEQUENT ACTION: Because of the issues raised by the adjacent Greenwood Village residents during the public hearing, the developer and CDM met with representatives of the adjacent area • I • • • • • • -3- in an effort to resolve their concerns. As a result of this discussion, the site plan was revised with the modifications addressing the problems of height, setback, buffer- ing and density at the east portion of the site. The revised plan was given to the neighbors and was discussed at a neighborhood meeting; however, no consensus was reached on the revised plan. At the advice of the City Attorney, the revised Plan is being forwarded to City Council for review, as well as the original Plan which was approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission. The revised Plan was discussed with the Commission; however, the City Attorney said they could not consider it out- side of a Public Hearing . For this reason, no action has been taken on the revised Plan by the Commission. Mr. DeWitt has advised that the City Council can act on the recommendation of the Com- mission or consider the revised Plan at a Public Hearing. Both the original and th e revised Plan are attached for the City Council's c onsideration. SUGGESTED ACTION: MOVED BY ____________________________ ___ SECOND ______________________________ __ YES NO·-----------~ ABSENT ________________________ _ • I • • - • • • • • CITY PLANNING AND ZON·ING COMMISSION ENGLEWOOD, ·coLORADO IN THE MATTER OF CASE NO. 13-84 ) FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS, AND ) RECOMMENDATIONS RELATING TO THE ) APPLICATION OF HR. KAL ZEFF FOR ) APPROVAL OF A DEVELOPMENT PLAN ) AS PROVIDED IN §22.4A, PLANNED ) DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT, OF THE ) COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE ) OF THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, ) COLORADO. ) A Public Hearing was held on February 22, 1984, in connection with Case No. 13-84 in the City Council Chambers in the Englewood City Hall. The following members were present: Mr. Barbre, Mr. Tanguma, Mr. Carson, Mr. Magnuson, Mr. McBrayer, Mr. Stoel, Mrs. Becker and Mr. Venard. Mr. Allen was absent. Upon review of the evidence taken in the form of testimony, presentations, reporcs, and filed documents, the City Plan~ing and Zoning Commission makes the following Findings of Fact: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. That notice of the Public Hearing held on February 22, 1984 was given in the Englewood Sentinel, the official City newspaper: on February 1, 1984. 2. That the property was posted for not less than 15 days prior to the Public Hearing. 3. That the application is concerned with an area east of the 5200 block of South Broadway and south of East Centennial Avenue, also formerly known as the "Pasternak Property", and identified as P.P.I. Number 2077 15 1 00 022, 020, and 005 in the records of the Arapahoe County Assessor. 4. That the property has been zoned for High Density Resi- dense use since 1964, and that the High Density Residence District per- mits a density of 40 dwelling units per acre with a density bonus to 70 dwelling units per acre, based on area assemblage • 5. That the area with which the application is concerned is owned by Mr. Kal Zeff, 950 South Cherry Street, Suite 1100, Denver, Colorado, 80231, and to be developed .by CDM Construction Co., Inc., 950 South Cherry Street, Suite 1110, Denver, Colorado 80231. 6. That the application for approval of a Development Plan for the above described property waa filed with the Departaent of Com- munity Development on January 19, 1984 • • I • • • • • • -2- 7. That the objective of Mr. Kal Zeff in filing an application for the approval of a Planned Development, is to construct 160 condominium units and 130 townhouse units, which ·units at some future time will be sold individually. 8. That the one-bedroom units will range in size from 668 square feet to 882 square feet, and the two bedroom units will range in size from 876 square feet to 1408 square feet. 9. That the density of the proposed Planned Development is 14.27 units per acre, with 58% of the total lot area, including the Big Dry Creek. easement, as open space and 46% of the total lot area landscaped. 10. That all buildings will be set back. from the property line 25 feet. 11. That a written statement and all other pertinent information was submittc<l with and attached to the applicutlon u s r<'qulretl In §22.111\-ld, of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, setting forth that: a. The long range objectives of the proposed Planned Development are to target the development to both first and second-time home buyers, designed to pro- mote a community feeling in a positive and pleasant environment. b. A site plan, landscape plan, and elevations have been provided which ·give a graphic interpretation of the aforementioned objectives. c. Construction will begin after approval of the Planned Developaent by the City Council, with construction to co ... nce in May 1984 and projected completion within two years of construction beginning. 12. That a pre-application conference was held between repre- sentatives of the applicant, staff aeabera of several departments of the City of Englewood, and representatives of adjacent jurisdictions to con- sider the preliminary plans and as a result of that conference, revisions were made to the preliminary plan which are reflected on the plan submitted at the February 22, 1984 meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission. 13. That upon review of the proposed Development Plan by various City departments, adjacent municipalities and other public agencies, the following comments have been received: Code Adainiatration. a. The General Plan design is acceptable in terms of apace needed for eaergency vehicle access into and through the property. It is possible that ao.e areas of the drive lanes may need to be posted as "Fire Lanes." b. The proposed deai&n of the water system for fire protection purposes auat be submitted on blueprints and approved prior to perait issuance for building construction • • I • • In - • • • • • -3- c. The water system for this property must be designed to supply enough wate·r to meet the required fire flow calculations (ISO) for the largest, most severely exposed structure in the development, and must provide an adequate number of on-site fire hydrants as determined by the Fire Chief. (Section 10-30l(c), 1982 Uniform Fire Code.) d. All fire hydrants and access roads must be usable immediately prior to and during any construction involving combustible material. (Section 10-301 (d) 1982 Uniform Fire Code.) Engineering Services: a. All streets must be constructed to City specifications. Fire: See Code Administration comments. Public Works: a. An acceleration lane may be necessary at Broadway. Traffic: a. Will access be pLovtded at Sunset Lane? (Staff comment: There will be no access to Sunset Lane.) b. Bridge located on Broadway south of access road should be widened. (Staff co .. ent: The developer is working with the Highway Department and has agreed to widen the bridge.) c. Adequate acceleration/deceleration lanes should be provided for all directions of entering or exiting traffic, including west-bound lefts to go south. This should be provided with Broadway having six through lanes. d. If accidents become a problem, then a "Right Turn Only" may be required at the egress point. Utilities: a, No co.ments at this time other than developer will have to meet utility department requirements as property is developed. Arapahoe County: No comments received. Greenwood Village: a. The 54 percent on-site open apace ia commendable; • I • • - • • • • -4- however, not very well organized. There are no open space areas large enough to conduct or attract any outdoor activities; This lack or organization will cause a demand on other adjacent recreational facilities. b. Multi-family complexes of this size and dimension are generally downgraded in their quality by the intermit t e nt parking and storage of recreation vehicles. There should be either a prohibition against storage of recreation vehicles, or an area set aside specifically for that use within the Plan. If there is to be a storage area defined on the Plan, please organize its location away from adjacent City boundaries. c. A number of the buildings are designed to accommodat e garages. The circulation system will be kept much freer of unattended parked vehicles if the garage entrances also have driveways. Littleton: a. Location of the 100-year floodplain of Big Dry Creek on the site plan. b. That the building setback along the extreme easterly property line be increased to fifty (50) feet with ex- tensive landscape screening to provide adequate visual screening of the adjacent single-family residential. c. That provision of an additional acceleration/deceleration lane along South Broadway be required. Littleton School District: a. The facilities serving the area are: School Eugene Field Elementary Goddard Junior High Littleton High School Capacity 462 1190 1495 Enrollment 390 896 1266 b. School District participation in public use dedication by developer: The School District uses a land dedica- tion formula in determining its share of the amount of land donated by the developer to the City government for public use . In this instance, the District's share would amount to .39 acres of land, or the cash value at the time of dedication in lieu of land. c. Student impact: Based on the current yield of students froa dwellings, the completed subdivision would yield a. approximately 87 students 38 elementary students, 25 junior high students, and 24 senior high school students. Noise impacts from adjacent arterials must be mitigated by developer • • I • • • • • • -5- b. A signalized intersection at the proposed entrance will not be permitted unless the existing signal at Centennial is abandoned. c. The Big Dry Creek bridge will need to be widened to accommodate the acceleration/deceleration lane. Urban Drainage and Flood Control District: a. We recommend that the proposed 100-foot drainage ease- ment be expanded, where n ecessary, to include the en- tire Big Dry Creek channel to the top of the bank. b. The district has been involved in maintenance activities along this reach of Big Dry Creek. In order to preserve the ability to continue those activities, we would re- quest a maintenance access rlght a e ro,;,; the prlvat c drives and parking lots as we ll as two ramps from th e top of the bank to channc l hot tom. c. We would reconunend that the stability and erosion potential of the very steep banks be investigated and, if needed, bank stabilization be required. d. The 100-year flood plain limit should be shown on the development plan. The floodplain exceeds the channel limits at the south end of the property and should he so documented. e. Who will have initial maintenance responsibility for the channel, the development or the City? f. The District must approve design plans for any flood control facilities to be constructed if the facilities are to be eligible for district maintenance assistance. Public Service Company: No comments received. Mountain Bell: a. A blanket easement will be required with exact details to be worked out at the time of development. 14. That there were no persons present who spoke in favor of the proposed development. 15. That there were seven persona who spoke in opposition to the proposed development, those being: Linda Fornof, David Fornof, John Campbell, Phil DuBois, Bob Howell, Josephine Ipsen, and Dr. Roy Lininger. 16. That a letter which was read into the record of the Hearing from Richard G. Shearer also expressed opposition to the proposed develop- ment • • I • • • • • • -6- 17. That the issues addressed by those in opposition to the proposed development were: a. Relationship of the proposed development to the 100- year flood plain. b. Future access to East Powers Avenue. c. Fencing of the southern property line. d. Need for Environmental Impact Statement. e. Impact on traffic flow on adjacent streets. f. Practical maximum density of the proposed develop- ment. g. Sufficient water and sewer service to serve the pro- posed development. h. Decrease in density and height of the proposed de- velopment. i. Increase in setbacks for the proposed development. CONCLUSIONS The City Planning and Zoning Commission concludes: 1. That proper notice of the Public Hearing was given. 2. That no persons other than the representatives of the applicant spoke in favor of the proposed development. 3. That seven persons spoke in opposition to the proposed development. 4. That one letter was received in opposition to the proposed development, which letter was read into the record of the Hearing. 5. That evidence relative to the proposed Planned Develop- ment was entered into the record of the Public Hearing which demonstrates compliance with applicable zoning regulations. RECOMMENDATIONS Therefore, it is the recommendation of the City Planning and Zoning Commission to the City Council that the proposed Planned Develop- ment be approved with the following conditions: 1. Some areas of the drive lanes may need to be designated as "fire lanes" as determined by the Fire Marshal. 2. The proposed design of the water systea for fire protection purposes must be aubaitted on blueprints and approved prior to perait issuance for building construction • • I • • n - • • • • • -7- 3. TI1e water system for this property must be designed to supply enough water to meet the required fir~ flow calculations (ISO) for the largest, most severely exposed structure in the development and must provide an adequate number of on-site fire hydrants, as deter- mined by the Fire Chief. (Section 10-301 (c), 1982 Uniform Fire Code .) 4. All fire hydrants and access roads must be usable immediat e ly prior to and during any construction involving combustible materials. (Section 10-301 (d), 1982 Uniform Fire Code.) 5. All streets are to be built to City standards. 6. The South Broadway/Big Dry Creek bridge should be widened with adequate acceleration and deceleration lanes and a center storage lane for southbound traffic exiting from site. 7. The st reet providing access to the site s hould be named as per metro grid system. 8. Egress from the site may be limited to right-turn only if the number of accidents increase at this intersection. 9. The 100-foot drainage easement should be expanded, where necessary, to include the entire Big Dry Creek channel to the top of the bank. 10. A maintenance access right across the private drives and parking lots as well as two ramps from the top of the bank to the channel bottom should be provided to the Urban Drainage District. 11. The 100-year flood plain limit should be shown on the De- velopment Plan. The flood plain exceeds the channel limits at the south end of the property and should be so documented. 12. Initial maintenance responsibility for the channel must be established. 13. Urban Drainage and Flood Control must approve design plans for any flood control facilitiea to be constructed if the facilities are to be eligible for District maintenance assistance. 14. Fencing in addition to the proposed landscaping shall be installed in the southeast portion of the proposed development. Upon the vote on a motion made by Mrs. Becker and seconded by Mr. Magnuson: Those voting in favor were: Mr. Barbre, Mrs. _Becker, Mr. Carson, Mr. Magnuson and Mr. Venard. Those voting in opposition were: Mr. McBrayer, Mr. Steel, and Mr. Tanguma. Mr. Allen was absent. By Order of the City Planning and Zoning Commission • I • • STAFF REPORT Page -1- STAFF REPORT RE: • • • Request for approval of a Planned Development. DATE TO BE CONSIDERED: February 22, 1984 APPLICANT AND OWNER: Kal Zeff 950 South Cherry -Suite 1100 Denver, Colorado 80231 ADDRESS OF SUBJECT PROPERTY: 5200 Block South Broadway (Former Pasternak Property) ISSUES TO BE CONSIDERED: PLANNED DEVELOPMENT Case 1113-84 The City Planning and Zoning' Commission is to consider the layout of a proposed 290-unit Planned Development to be located on the former Pasternak property which lies to the east of the Target Store at 5450 South Broadway. The location of the buildings on the site, the land- scaping, drainage, off-street parking, open space, flood plain, lighting, points of access and areas to be reserved for public purpose are among the issues to be considered when reviewing the proposed Planned Develop- ment. ACTION TO BE TAKEN: A developer proposing to construct four or more residential dwelling units must file a Planned Development as specified in 122.4-6b(2){b) of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance. The proposal must be considered by the Planning Commission at a public hearing, following which hearing the Planning Commission may approve or conditionally approve the Develop- ment Plan, or refer the Plan back to the applicant for corrections. If the Development Plan is approved or approved with conditions, it is referred to the City Council for final action. The City Council may accept the recommendation of the Planning Commission and approve the Planned Development; or, if the Council is of the opinion that additional information is necessary, a public hearing on the Planned Development may be scheduled. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: See attached Plan, I • - • STAFF REPORT Pa e -2- ZONE DISTRICT: ,. • • • PLANNED DEVELOPMENT Case Ul3-84 R-3, High Density Residence. Multi-family dwellings are permitted in this district, with a maximum density of 40 units per acre. ANNEXATION DATA: This area was annexed by Ordinance il3 of 1964. DESCRIPTION OF SUBJECT SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA: The subject site is an area of approximately 20 acres situated south of East Centennial Avenue and east of South Broadway. The site was for- merly known as the "Pasternak Property". Big Dry Creek traverses along the west side of the site from Southeast to Northwest. The site is bordered by Greenwood Village and unincorporated Arapahoe County on the east, Littleton on the south. Burt Chevrolet and Target are on the north and west sides of the site. The site has 306 feet of frontage on South Broadway; however, only approximately SO'of frontage is avail- able for access to the site. The developer haa agreed to widen the Broadway bridge over Big Dry Creek in order to maximize the access. In Englewood, the pro·perty bordering the site is zoned B-2, Business; in Arapahoe County, the adjacent land is zoned R-3, Single-family; in Greenwood Village, the adjacent zoning is R-1.0, Single-family, and in Littleton the adjacent land is zoned R-E, Residential-Estate District. BACKGROUND: The property was annexed by Ordinance Number 13 of 1964, and a zone classification of R-3-A, Multi-family Residence District, was placed on it following the required public hearings. The property has not developed until this time in part because the Fire Department has traditionally re- quired two access points. Since it is impossible to provide the second access from within Englewood, it was necessary to work with adjacent jurisdictions, and Greenwood Village, Littleton, and Arapahoe County would not grant the needed secondary access. The Fire Department is now taking the position that one access point is adequate provided their other concerns are met. COMMENTS FROM OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS, ADJACENt MUNICIPALITIES, AND PUBLIC AGENCIES: Code Administration: 1. The General Plan design is acceptable in terms of space needed for emergency vehicle access into and through the property. It is possible that some areas of the drive lanes may need to be posted as "Fire Lanes." I • • - ( • STAFF REPORT Page -3- • • • PLANNED DEVELOPMENT Case 113-84 2. The proposed design of the water system for fire protection purposes must be submitted on blueprints and approved prior to permit issuance for building construction. 3. The water system for this property must be designed to supply enough water to meet the required fire flow calculations (ISO) for the largest, most severely exposed structure in the development, and must provi~e an adequate number of on-site fire hydrants as determined by the Fire Chief. (Section 10-30l(c), 1982 Uniform Fire Code.) 4. All fire hydrants and access roads must be usable immediately prior to and during any construction involving combustible material. (Section 10-301 (d) 1982 Uniform Fire Code.) Engineering Services: 1. All streets must be constructed to City specifications. Fire: See Code Administration comments. Public Work.&: 1. i ) I··•'' An acceleration lane may be necessary at Broadway. Traffic: 1. Will access be provided at Sunset Lane? (Staff co .. ent: there will be no access to Sunset Lane.) 2. Bridge located on Broadway aouth of access road should be widened. (Staff comment: the developer is working with the Highway De- partment and has agreed to widen the bridge.) 3. Adequate acceleration/deceleration lanes should be provided for all directions of entering or exiting traffic, including west- bound lefts to go south. This should be provided with Broadway having six through lanes. 4. If accidents become a problem, then a "Right Turn Only" -y be required at the egress point. Utilities: 1. No co..enta at thia time other than developer will have to meet utility department requirements as property is developed. Arapahoe County: No comments received. Greenwood Village: 1. The 54 percent on site open apace ia eaa.endable; however, not v ry well organized. There are no open apace areas lara• enouah to eon- duct or attract any outdoor aetivitiea. Thia lack of oraaaization will I • - ,._..., ( • STAFF REPORT Page -4- • • • PLANNED DEVELOPMENT Case #13-84 cause a demand on other adjacent recreational facilities. 2. Multi-family complexes of this size and dimension are generally downgraded in their quality by the intermittent parking and storage of recreation vehicles. There should be either a prohibition against storage of recreation vehicles, or an area set aside specifically for that use within the Plan. If there is to be a storage area defined on the Plan, please organize its location away from adjacent City boundaries. 3. A number of the buildings are designed to accommodate garages. The circulation system will be kept much freer of unattended parked vehicles if the garage entrances also have driveways. Littleton: 1. Location of the 100-year floodplain of Big Dry Creek on the Site Plan. 2. That the building setback along the extreme easterly property line be increased to fifty (50) feet with extensive landscape screening to provide adequate visual screening of the adjacent single-family resi- dential. 3. That provision of. an additional acceleration/deceleration lane along South Broadway be required •. Littleton School District: 1. The facilities serving the area are: School Eugene Field Elementary Goddard Junior High Littleton High School Capacity 462 1190 1495 Enrollment 390 896 1266 2. School District participation in public uae dedication by developer: The School District uses a land dedication formula in deter- mining ita share of the amount of land donated by the developer to the City government for public use. In this instance, the District's share would amount to .39 acres of land, or the cash value at the time of dedication in lieu of land. 3. Student impact : Based on the current yield of students from dwellings, the completed subdivision would yield approximately 87 students-- 38 elementary students, 25 junior high students, and 24 senior hi&h school students. State Highway Department: No comments received. Urban Drainage and Flood Control District: 1. We recommend that the proposed 100-foot drainage eaaeaent be expanded, where necessary, to include the entire Big Dry Creek channel to the top of the bank • • I • • - I_.., ( • ( • STAFF REPORT Page -5- • • • PLANNED DEVELOPMENT Case #13-84 2. The District has been involved in maintenance activities along this reach of Big Dry Creek. In order to preserve the ability to con- tinue those activities, we would request a maintenance access right across the private drives and parking lots as well as two ramps from the top of the bank to channel bottom. 3. We would reco111111end that the stability and erosion potential -of the very steep banks be investigated and, if needed, bank stabilization be required. 4. The 100-year flood plain limit should be shown on the develop- ment plan. The floodplain excepts the channel limits at the south end of the prope rty and should be so documented. 5. Who will have initial maintenance responsibility for the channel, the development or the City? 6. The District must approve design plans for any flood control facilities to be constructed if the facilities are to be eligible for district maintenance assistance. Public Service Company: No comments received. Mountain Bell: 1. A blanket easement will be required with exact details to be worked out at the time of development. DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ANALYSIS: This development will provide 290 units composed of townhomes and condominiums. The site contains 20.3 acres which includes 4.4 acres in the Big Dry Creek drainage easement. Detailed below is a review of this proposed development's compliance with the R-3, High Density Zoning Regulations. P R 0 P 0 S E D With Big Dry Without Big Creek Easement Dry Creek ll!Suired Eaa-nt Minimum Lot Area 1 Net Acre 20.327 Acres 15.972 Acres Permitted Density 40 Units/net 14.27 units/ 18.15 unital acre acre acre Lot Coverage 35% 18% 23% Minimum Usable Open Space 25% 581 46.8% • I • • ( ( • STAFF REPORT Page -6- Minimum Floor Area: Efficiency/One Bedroom Two Bedroom Minimum Landscaping Minimum Building Height Minimum Setbacks Minimum Off-Street Parking • • • Required 650 sq. ft. 750 sq. ft. 25% 5 stories PLANNED DEVELOPMENT Case 1113-84 Proposed 668 sq. ft. 882 sq. ft. 876 sq. ft. 1408 sq. ft. 46% (over 200 street trees to be pro- vided.) 2 stories + garden level (P. D. provides for flexibility in setbacks). 493 spaces 577 spaces This proposed multi-family development meets or exceeds all require- ments of the R-3 Zoning Ordinance. DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT RECOMMENDATIONS: Given the history and difficulties associated with developing this site, the Department of Community Development recommends that the Broadway Planned Development be approved with the following conditions: 1. Some areas of the drive lanes may need to be designated as "fire lanes" as determined by the Fire Marshal. 2. The proposed design of the water system for fire protection pur- poses must be submitted on blueprints and approved prior to permit issuance for building construction. 3. The water system for this property must be designed to supply enough water to meet the required fire flow calculations (ISO) for the largest, most severely exposed structure in the development and must provide an adequate number of on-site fire hydrants, as determined by the Fire Chief. (Section 10-JOl(c), 1982 Uniform Fire Code.) 4. All fire hydrants and access roads must be usable immediately prior to and during any construction involving coabustible materials. (Section 10-30l(d), 1982 Uniform Fire Code.) 5. All streets are to be built ·to City standards. 6. The South Broadway Big Dry Creek bridge should be widened with adequate acceleration and deceleration lanes and a center atorage lane for southbound traffic exiting from site • I • • STAFF REPORT Page -7- • • • PLANNED DEVELOPMENT Case #13-84 7. The street providing access to the site should be named as per metro area grid system. B. Egress from the site may be limited to right-turn only if th e number of accidents increase at this intersection. 9, The 100-foot drainage easement should be expanded, where necessary, to include the entire Big Dry Creek channel to the top of the bank. 10, A maintenance access right across the private drives and parking lots as well as two ramps from the top of the bank to the channel bottom should be provided to the Urban Drainage District. 11. The 100-year flood plain limit should be shown on the Develop- ment Plan. The flood plain exceeds the channel limits at the south end of the property and should be so docuntented. 12. Initial maintenance responsibility for the channel must be established. 13, Urban Drainage and Flood Control must approve design plans for any flood control facilities to be constructed if the facilities are to be eligible for District maintenance assistance. • I • • > < ~ 0 < 0 a: CD J: t- :::l 0 C/)· • SUBJECT SITE ----~-------------· 'I L I f l-------'..._--.wJ.-:-0 _ _.,.____ I -n: . r NORTH I ' -~ ~ ~ ~ SCALE I -.. • 1" = 250' • • • 0 PROPOSED BROADWAY SUBDIVISION WAIVER AND PLANNED DEVELOPMENT LITTLETO • T 1 • - • - • • • . . • . . Gs~ .---'·m ' r-'(_j , .. -. . ' ·, '. . ~:.::J ' ' .'t :. .! ;~ . cornpan1es January 13 , 1984 Ms. Susan T . Kin~ Senior Planner 3400 South Elati Street En~lewood, Colorado 80110 Dear Hs. King, Please find attached the materials '"hich cornorise the written statement portion of our application for a~proval of a Develooment Plan. They are: 1 . Vacant Land Contract as proof that Kal Zeff is the true owner of the land as well as a le~al descriotion of such land from • the Title Commitment. 2. A statement of objectives to be achieved by the development. 3 . A letter from Dal~ Boyd, President of CDM Construction , to Bill Baer, outlininp, the prooosed development schedule for the project. 4 . A copy of the exceptions pa~e from the Title Commitment showing easements which will affect the development of the property. I trust this will provide the information required. Sincerely, /~ ~ ~i.·t\ ?;f ~·Jizu1 ~d E~leen M. S~anley j CDM Companies /ems attachments 950 south cherry &t.rett. • suite 1100 • denver. colorado 80222 • 13031 759-5123 • I • • - ( ( ! .:..:.=--~---- T.,, '"1111 •4 "'''•~~•efllu o r.,_ •••••••4 h ,.,, J c •••••<~• ••••t.••••r -,.,,•••••uir Jf.J·••• • • • nus rs 1 UW.IGfluutn • •arnDliiTift. uua.. tu •• orc1 colll!SlL ._..., • co•suuu aro•r...... I' VACANT LAND CONTRACT TO BUY AND SELL REAL ESTATE (Remedies Include Specific Perlormence) I ___ _,.AugllS..t-L._,I 9 .63. I 1. The undeni«n•d aa;-ent he reby adcnowledae• hav1nl' recei11rd from ..Mt:.-...Kal Zeff II • lht•umofi _$..5~.000-.00nth e formof ----_§_p_~!ll~_r:U!.t.e ,loheh•ldb1 .LandJi.Ue_Insurance_company ,,, hrnkr r, '" broker'• ••crnw nr truatee arrount. a111 eatnf'llt mnnf'y anfl ,..,,,, f'IA )'mrn t fnr th• fnllnw ina tir.•C'r.J ... ,J r,.R I ••tatf'tnthe Cit)' of Enql.evooc:k-.ountror..Arapaboe __ ,c.olundn,Low•t 1 Property so described in Exhibit "A", hereto attached and made a part hereof. ton-ttt.r w ith all ea!lf'menta afMI r••hte of way appurLe>nant thneto, anJt all i mprovement. ther•on anrf ell f a•ture• of a Pf!rman~nt nature c-urrently on the premia.• ••c-f'pl •• herP!na(lt-r prnvide tl , i n their prro••nt rnndihun, nnhnftr)' ••u and lt-areue plf'd, and h e reinllher l'allf'd thf' PrnJ1C'rl y, 2 Thf'undenlrn•dPl'r•n')ll)f-Ml:--KALZefL -·--·---------· ·-___ --· tt 'f4(1'fn!lflw;tl'l"'jft1f~/t!'1'J4'/"1• hereindtn nllf'd Purrhaall't, heralt)'oftlfreea to buy lhf' ProJN'r\y, •n•l ll"' I' und•n•~rned ow nf'th), hf'reindlet called S.lkor, hetf'by aKr••• lo ••II the J'roperly upnn the Lerma and C'u nd,llou• I •tat I'd h•rel n . 3. The p url'ha•• pnre a hall be U.S . t.lJJtL_Q.Q.Q.. OJl.. payable •• foll owa : a......S.5.l....Jl.DO . he reby riH'e'iJ•Wd fo r ; I $850,000.00 to be paid in cash or certified !unda on date of II del1very of deed. •· Prl .. ~oio•ludo : Any and all water or water righta, ditch or ditch rig s, together with all water well• and ant and all righta thereto, and i luu • .,. 'n · • ., 'o>oo :all mineral rights held in title by Purchaaer appertaining to said property. h lo an, (b) uecu&.. all dHY-.nU and lurnlah all information and d-.ruMent• reqYiretlltr t coat a or obta lnl"-IYch loan. Then lr IVl'h loan ia not approved on or before.._~·=---- I ru1.,. ut w11 ltu<ll "''"',. ~~ t t"t ma a nd C'ond!llon a or aurh lo a n r•r('pt h• hrr f'in provu ,. I , If fl '~, ,.,. ntAd (' payablr to Stllrr as parlud or full pa) nwntlir l h(' pur<'h a•e prin•. t I r "' ·~ -1· '')" J•urd'""'' w tlhout wnttrn rnnaent of Sf'llrr ~~-.~~"'~~~~~~~~~~~~~~"-~~~~~~~~------ -----='==--=~ --=--==--=--====-:---::--:---'IJ .,( 27 flil .l •'"''""'*"•••••,_.lil• .. f •hl•t \ .. •allo•41 ..... u.,,,,,.,.,,,.h,,,, ··~·. • '-•h .... 1 .~ ........ , • ................ , • • ... ,. • • I • ( • • • .. - ,, I' I 9. lr/ fll.'l'lr/ frj.ji.1,4/#1Yr/>f¥Y,w,lf'o.lt</'ti •/lll//n/1) r um•n\ rornrm\mrnl for lrtle in•uran<r pol iry '" "" :I amount equal lo the purrhue prire, al Mller'•,6ftfof./•f.?' rxpenae. •holl be rurniah•d lo Purrh .. •r on or h•for<• 1 January 20 · , 19liA...IHrll ""'' •• fwr"i'~ ••Hki""-" · t , S.•ll e r w•l l I' I deliver the title in1urance policy to Purcha .. ·r after C'IO,I05! ord p:~y thr prt>mium then•on. 10. The dau of cloaina 1hall H the date for dt>livery of dt•rd as pro vtcll"d in p:arosrr"ph 11. The hour and piM C'r nf doainpholl be as duil'nated by Hal mqui st-Ogde.,..n.__,c...._a ... m..,p~a .. n.,yl'------------ ll. Title shall be merchantable in Seller, except •• alated in thi~ parasrraph and in para,:!rapha 12 and J:\. SubJrl't 1 to payment or trnder as above provided and C'omplinncr by f'urchaacor whlPtheo othtor trrms and proviaiun• lwn·nf . ~~·.II Seller ahall execute and deliver a pod and aufririf'nt Q"enera 1 warranty dt"ttd to PurC'hnllrr o n '----.J:ebuary 9 • 19....8..!, or, b)' mutual aaret"mrnt, at an t-arlirr date. convt>yin~r the Proprrty fn·•• n nd rtur or alllaan ..... pllho ... n.ral taa .. for th• y .. r or rlo•in ... #ltf:tr-1 ---------- free and C'lear of allliena for ·~cial improvrmt"nl!l installed QA of lhr dnlP or Purrhasrr's ~i~nnture ht.•n•on, wlwlhl'r aaae .. ed or not; free and clt>ar of allliena and l'nrumhran('t.•JI ..........,., I l e•uptthe followin,. reatrirtive rovenanb whit'h do not ('Ontain a ri-.rhl or revt"rtrr: ! 1 ' ! I and ou•pllh• rollowin• ·~·iri• recordod and/or apporrnl ••••m•nlo: Those 0 f record ~I i th 1) Pub 1 ~ c I Service Co., 2)Dry Creek drainageway: and J)City of Englewood, regar i n ) easement for water tower. I and aubject to buildincand &oninR re.ulationa. I 12 . Ear•pt aa stated in paraarapha I J and 13, if title iJ not mrrrhantahl• and writ~n notit'e of def•clt11l ill ,;v.-n by P~.orc·haser or Purchaaer 'a a~nt lo Seller or S•llr-r'a asrent on or bdore date or do1in~r. Miler aha II UJit' rl.'a~onaablt- 1 f'ffort to corttC't ~a1d dt'ff'C't(a} prior to date of dOll OK. If St'llt'r iJ UnAblt• \0 C'OrrtC't aaid dPrert(a) on or bdore I.Jatr or do•in•· at Seller'• opt inn and upon written notice to rurrhn1'er or Purrha,.rr 'a a••nl on nr bdor• datt> or rln111ng , thE> dat• nr C'IOiliOI' shall bt• f'Xtrndcod thirty day II ror tht' purpOilC or ('Orrt•rtinJr llaid dt.•recl(a). Ea('C"pla• llGtt'cl in JtAfUf,:J a p h 'I !I li 1:1 , 1r tit I• "'not rcndt•rf'd mrrrhantabl• a a providrd 1n t htll pnra~rnph J 2, at Purchaaer'a option. thi~ rontraC't !1ha i1 1M' votd and of no rffeC't and rorh part)' her•to •hall br r'Cirn ~wtl rrom nil olllh.mtiona hereunder •nd all paymf'nla •nil thina• or valu• rece1vtd her•under ahall be "'ll.arned to Purchalf'r. a.rurt'd by llena on lh• Prop.rtr •aC'e•d•lh• purcha!lf' pnrco .Lhi" rnntrnrl "hAll Itt' vnid and of no•rr«t and earh party herrto a hall M releaNd rrora all obh•aLiona hereundt-r and all payntt'Olll nnd thin~ra or value reC'eived hf'rpunder ahaU bt rrturned to Purthaaer. 14 . C.nt"ral t&Xf'll for thf' y•ar of C'loa1n1r . balf'd on t h" mo!lt rrrcnt lt>V)' and the moat r~r,•nt aa•t•urnrnt. Jlv/.·f.r/u/ ~~IJ~~~~~~~~JI~I.I~~JJ~I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~JJI~~~~~~~AJi __ __ ahall be apportioned lodat• ord.livf'r)' ord.ed. 15 . Pou .. aionorth•Prnportyahallbod•livcrrdtnrurrha•rron date of delivery of deed. N/A 1~. In tho OYontlhe Pro~riJ io oubalantially damalfOd by fire. nood or olh., raaually bolwHn I he date or lhlo C"ontrac-t and th• dat.f' of delivrry of deed , Purrh•~•r ma)' rl""rt to trrminate thi.-C'ontra"t: in whith raae all pay menta and t hm,.. of valu• rl't"•lved hereunder a hall bto ret.urn•dto Purrha!ler. ,I 17 . T ime ia or thr r11•nre herrnf. If An)' notr or rht'rk n ·cor ivC'd "" &•nrnf'At mnnr)' her•undttr or any other paymrnl I dut> ht>reuntffl'r ill nnt paut. hnnored or tendrr•d ""'hrn flu,•, or i ( a n y otlwr ohll,;:ation herrunder i• not. pt"r(ormed aa herrin prov•d•d . then •hall b• the fo11owin• rrm•d ira: t al IF SELLER IS IN DEFAULT, Oll'urrhaoor mn y ••l•rllo I root thiornnlrart aat•rmlnatrd, In wh~<h r••• I, ,, I: I, II ~uth dama .. u ., ml)' be proptor. or C2l Purrhllllrr mny t•lecl t o l r rnl th1a rnntrart a11 tw i nR in rull force and t•fft.'"C'l and PuHh a •cor "hall hnv•• thr r11rht to an Art inn rur AJM 'C'Iru· rw d u rmanr .. ur dama.-ea.or IN•lh. l bl IF PURCHASER IS IN DEFAULT, Ill Sr ll or rna )• ••l<rl to lrrnllhi• ronlrMrt ••l•rminal•d,ln wh irh ra... I all pay mrnll and th1n11" of vatu• rtC'eiYf'd hrrt"und .. r ~hn ll br forfeated anti retained on tK.•half of ltllrr and N-11.-r j may r •rovf'r aurh dam a•"• aa may be proprr. or (2) S~ll&•r ma)' rlt'rl to trt-at thia contraC't ae beinr tn f~ll rorC'e anti ~~~ .. rrert and S..ll•r ahall hav" the riaht to an aC'lion for apcC'ef•t pcorformanr• or flam••••. or both. ((') Anythln. to the C'Ontrarr herein not•·•thatantilna. in lhe •vent ot anr litiaahon ., •• ,". oul or thlll t ont riC't , the C'ourt may award to the prevallin• rart y all rra,onabl• rnata and ea~nat, intlurlina a\torn&•)••' fc-••• 1R f•u r r hau r and !'~11•r ••ret that , i ft thr rvt"n t or a n ~· r nn lro vt'ray rrJ!ardin• the rarn<>lll nw nry )w ht h v ltto l..t ' u r !t "'\ mu tun l v.r ttlt'n 1n strurt 1n n Ia rer t iVtd b)' h rokr r. bro\t rr !lhali nnt Lr rrqu ~r r rl to tnkr "")' nrt •onln1 t 111n ' 11 '' n\ r u~ t·nl l!.f ,, ul 1 rolu r's optio n and d~J c-r t t lon , mft\' 10\l 'fll h •tul :ttl )' IIII •IW\" o r l hill to! .. ,,f \'lllut 11 . ''' • '"' 1 I 11 • I • • ( • It I I I I .'.-. ,;· eJ. .. 'I ,I I! 'I 19 . Ath.lataunMl provisaons : • • • ··-. -···-----·-··--·----------------·- 1) Legal Counsel: The undersigned acknowledge that Holmquist -u ~ Company has adv1sed the seller and purchaser to have legal c ou n represent them in connection with handling the sale and purc h<~~·; the property. 2) It is understood and agreed that an easement shall be granted The City of Englewood in correlation with this Agreement for an extension of the City water line located in South Broadway. ""\ easement shall have a width of 10 feet and an approximate le ny t 490 feet, conunencing at the southeast corner of Centennial /\v e11 South Broadway, thus proceeding south in a parallel line and i nu iately adjacent to the east side of Broadway, until abutting t l, so described in Exhibit "A", hereto attached and made a part !11·. Said Sellers shall stand the responsibility and cost of grant i n easement. Subject to owners being able to deliver said ea sc m ~·"' 3) It is understood and agreed that the terms and conditions ~u in the Contract dated May 16, 1983, by and between the subje c t 'i and purchaser on the subject property, are now null and void, u,. releasing all parties from the previously agreed upon obligati u1 1 Said Fifty Thousand Dollars {$50,000.00) now held in escrow b y l ~ Title Insurance Company shall be released and paid in full t o des i gnated Sellers on or after August 9, 1983. V II ~0. tr thio pro.JIU••I io atftpted b)' S..ller In wr1l1n• and PurchaMr re<·oiveo noLi<e or ou<h a«•~tMn<• on or lo.-f uo ,. ----~~ August 1 ~. , 11-Al., t.hia l nalrument. ahallbt!rome a conlrad klwaen lkller and Purchau~r Mnd -h : 1 _. J ~ ~,I nure lO lhf' benefll orlhe hein. auC.r•uora and &llllf08 ofauch parlica.exceplu alal~d i n para.ra.-h '1 ~~,...-. !:A£ 2~ r 5: (3 Brokor ------.:.c=='---1j '"f;C~ Kal Ze u ... Holmquist-Ogden Compa ny ~~.j ~~~~e;ooa:a8~hi81~~ad, ~ 3 0 ~~~----------------------~ By: ___________________________ _ ~ {I' : ,..,,.,..._, o.~ .. ! Purch ... r 'oAddrooo 4101 E. Louiaiana Avenue' Denver, Colorado ---1 lo pa)' a commiooion 0 'II> or lho purchaM prico for oeniH • iiod aaroeolhat, tn lho ovont or rorreituro or pay menlo and thin .. 0 V ndor, ouch pa)'IMII&a an<ilhinp of vaiuo OhM II bo d 1vidod bolwe•n h or, ono ·halfl h oreor ~ aaid broktr, but no miaaion, and the ~~~ S.llor'oAddrno ----------------------------------- v.~~~~~~~AI------------------~---------' .. -. '-.... ) ~-c.._,_~ Susan Pasternak ~~J. .... ,-,. Th e Trus t of Ba r i M. P.-.ut <·J n II • I • • - r • ( • • • - r ~-. -.--:-···"'Tt--. J .·t . ' ,. .... ~-·--.-.-~~--..........._ ... _,.__~====·::\)....o*'lfoll"w.I.'::I:::J.:...::r··~'!, .,. . ' I • * , I eC''f <-~.: . .a-\1..~~-------·--·· --· I I EXHIBIT "A" Subjec::t property located in tho i~~~mediate vicinity o·r 5200 South Broadway, En&lewood, Colorado, as outlined in red • . ' 'I "I N ct. £ I W 0 "0 Q • I • • • • - ., , '" I (•r :•I C l l ()N 1 ~. TOW:~SH l fJ :3 SO UTH, flANGE 6 0 WES1 (II-'I HI (,I If .. ., !I~ !''/,1_ rt~R J D l o \r ~. COUN f Y O F AR•\I'AHOE, Sl ATE OF CULUI I A!)u , f lJ IH IU 1 :, ;.~-,.-,, OF THE ARAPAHOE CO Vt JTR Y CLU D GROUN D. MORE PAR TJCULAilLY :Ot::~c;.; UED AS F OLLOWS . C G MM ~N C JNG AT THE SOUTHW~5T CORNER OF THE NORlHEAST ONE-OUAR TE H UF St .J!) S ECTION 15; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID N ~R T~EAST ONE-QUARTER A DISTANCE OF 1~20 31 FEET TU THE POINT OF \._..,. BEG lWHNG · THENCE' ON AN •\NGLE TO THE LEFT OF 90 DEGREES 00 MINU TE~ 00 ;E ~ONDS A DISTANCE OF 314 .20 FEET. THENCE ON AN ANGLE TO THE ( ( • LEFT OF 49 DEGREES tB MINUTES 16 SECONDS A DISTANCE OF 388 . 57 FEET . .,.>1t:I4C.,: ON At~ ANGLE TO THC:: LEFT OF 20 DEGREES 29 MINuTES 31 SE CUN OS .. DiS T .~r~(.E OF 2:19 3;l FEET TO A POINT OF CURVE ; THENCE ALON(; A <.Ufl 'iE TO TnE RIGH T HAVING A RADIUS OF 600.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF J8 ~E~R ~E ~ 47 MINUTES 51 SECONDS. AN ARC DI S TANCE OF 406 29 FEET TO A ~~IN ' QF TANGENT, THENCE ALONG SAID TANGENT A DI S TA~CE OF 247 . 56 ~E E l . THENCE ON AN ANGLE TO THE LEFT OF 43 DEGREES 40 MINUTES 04 --U.f 1•H•:> ;\ D ISTANCE OF 217,43 FEET TO •' POINT ON THE EI\ST niGH T Uf-' WAY L I NE OF S OUTH DROAD~AV . THENCE ON AN AN~LE TU TIE niGHT OF 7~ I)E.QRE.E.S 00 Ml r4UTES 00 SE-:ut~~DS A DISTANCE D r 306 . 4') l't:ET. l HEN CE lJN M J AI-ICLt. T:J ;HE ifiGHT OF 90 DEGn EES 00 MINU TES Ou SEC ONDS A D!S TAN CC ()F 10 .00 FEt:r . H1ENCE ON AN ANGt .t: TO THE HIGHT OF 90 O E::~fl E ES 00 MINUTES 00 S~C ON~S A DISTANCE OF 116 21 F EE T; TI~NC E ON AN AN GLE TU THE L ~FT OF 58 DEGREES 10 MINUTE5 00 SECON~S A DISTANCE UF 91 . 7 9 FEE-T ; ~>iENCi:: ON AN ANGLE TO THE LEFT OF 1u DEGREES 50 MINUTES 00 SECON'OS .; ;:•I3 TANCE OF 233 . S7 Fi::ET. THENCl ON AN ANGLE Ttl THE RICH l 0~ 41 DEG-R E ES ~0 MINUTES 04 S t.::CUN j)S A DI S TAN ~£ 0~ 3t2.37 f'IO:F.:T TO r. POINT OF C•J F·,•E ; THENCE ALONG A CUHV[ TU THE LEFT HAVING r, HAOlU ~ ul · 4-40 .00 FE:E1', •' CH1TRAL A:·;.:LE uF 06 D.:GREES 42 111NlJ'i[S 08 <;ECOND S. ,.., /ItA[._ 1)15TANC:E D F 5 1 47 FEt:r. THENCE ON AN ANGLE TO THE LE F T OF 10 ;• DEO~E.E.S ~l 11lt1UTES 29 SE CO NDS A :>ISTANCE OF 553 .02 FEET , THENCE UN ~N ANoLE TCJ -·Mt: HlGHT OF 104 DEGREES ~5 MINUTES 33 m :CONDS A 0 J 51' AN •:E 0 ~ ~l 0. <45 FEET ; THt:NCE ON AI~ ANGLE TO THE LEFT OF 20 DE~EES 21 MINUTES 00 SECONDS A DISTANCE OF 174 20 FEET . THENCE ON AN ANCiLE TO i •IE HIGHT OF 57 DE~R E F.S 17 MINUTES 20 SECONDS A DISTANC E 0~ 171j, -4;2 F E !:. T , THENCE ()N AN AN~LE TO THE LEFT OF 51 DEGHEt:S 32 ~IN~~EG 20 Se COND& A DlS:~NCE OF ~99 15 F EET . THENCE ON AN ANGLE TO ~~~ L~FT OF )4 DEG REES 4 ~ MINUTES 00 SECONDS A DISTANCE OF 79 .37 ~E.E.T ; T -i EtK~ ON .\N AN~L E TO THE RIGHT OF 00 DEGREES 10 MINUTE S 00 ?~C O~? ..; DI3T AN CE OF 7;! 0 0 FEE T . TliENCE ON AN ANGLE TO THE RIGHT 0~ ~0 :JE.;.f<EES 00 MINU T ES 0 0 SEC ONDS A DI S TANCE OF 206 . 95 FEET ; ·n-f£NCE. :.m At~ AUGLE TO TH E Rl GHT OF 89 DEGREES 30 MINUTES 00 SECONDS A VIS'f'A I~CE 0 ~ Q25 . 00 FEET TO THE POINT OF DEiliNNINO, EXCEPTING T HE~FROM THAT P ARCEL DEEDED TO THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD IN DEED RECORVEO NJv~MDER 13, l97q IN DO Q ~ 3117 AT PAGE 273 AND THAT PORTION C.ONVEYE~ TO :;JT i OF ENGLEWOOD IN P.UL E ANI> ORDER RECORDED JUNE 15. 1'181 rN 0 0014-J 43 l AT PAOE ~~q------------ • I • • - ( • • • • 0 cornpan1es STATEMENT OF OBJECTIVES This development will be targeted to both the first and second time homebuyer, desi~ned to promote a community feelin~ in a oositive and pleasant environment. The buildin~s are ~laced to take full advanta~e of the natural tono~ranhv and atmosphere of the surroundinn open sites. A clubhouse and nool ave Planned, for use by all the residents. By usin~ quality buildinR co~oonents, a hi~h standard of ap~earance will be achieved. BuildinR desi~n will conform to local codes of life safety and ener~y. 950 south cherry street • &ulte 1100 • denY.-. c:olonldo 80222 • 13031759-5123 • I • • .. ( • January 9, 1984 Mr. Bill Baer Baer & Hickman 2910 East 6th Avenue Denver, Colorado 80206 Re: Broadway :.190 units Dear Bill: • • • At this time we anticipate that construction of the Broadway project would, because of the shape of the site, be completed as a single, on going, phase. Con- struction progress would be matched to sales. Assuming that all municipal approvals can be obtained by May l, 198~ and Building Permits can be purchased, construction would commence on or about May l, 1984. With normal marketing success, we would assume a 24- month total project build-out. Thank you. \Sincerely yours, t)..~~~ Dale W. Boyd DWB:mb 9~ south c:herTy •trwt. u. 1100. denver. colol"edo 80222.13031758-5123 • I • • - • ( • • • • & I SCHEDULE 9-2 <Exception-.) App 1 ication No . A0130141 . ., ;•oll :•; or ;~ol1Cil!s to b• 1ssued will cont.a1n I!ICE!ptions to th• •. la w1n ~ ~nl~ss ~h• ~ami! arl! dispor.ed of to thl! satisfaction of thl! .t."-·r..n y Stan j ~rd Eac~pt1ons 1 through 5 printl!d on thv cuv~r shel!t . '· T~dl!~ ~n~ assessml!nts not vet due or payablv and spec1al assessment• ~ot ~~t certified to the Treasurl!r's offici! . . -.,...J -·' 1-«1:l tcOJl'!. or ar.se!>s.ments aga1nst said land i-... ·:;[MF.NT AS 1i~t\rHED TO COLORADO OEPAIHMENT OF HIGHWAYS IN lNSTRUMEN·r •c :!J<·C:l• .;(·f~lL 24. 1956 lN DCJOK 964 AT PAGE 7-:J E.:.::.E ··'~.rn AS ·~FcANTED TO PUOLlC SERVICE COMPANY OF COLORADO IN ~rJ;T::.ul·lENT RECORDED APRIL J1 , 1951 IN BOL1K 714 AT PA~E 343 . :;,-,_~['l f:'H ; .. ::; .;;RANTED TO SO'..iTH E.N GLEWOO D SMJITATIOt~ DISH-IICT IN :n.-i : '-"'1Er<1 Hr(ORUEIJ OCTDuER 5 . 1956 lr~ BOOI\ ·.:;>BB AT PA'E 524 ~ . .:.,<; "i~:iT AS ,_;~ANTl::D TO P •jhLJC SEkVICE COI'lPANY OF COLO~ADO IN i t•~1"\.1~'1E•JT f'<ECORDED .JUNE ~1. 19,61 IN BOOK 1266 AT PAGE 570 ::..>.;,r.···; r H AS ·::i!:IANTED TO SOUTH ARA?AHOE SANITAT !ON DlSTRlCT IN i r~::.1 '-',-'"'!c!H RECORDED I'IAV 1. 1qb2 IN BOOK 1336 AT PAQE 196 . ;;.l ·:.H :,.. 1tJ AND TO BlQ DRY C.REEK ALONQ THE 50UTHWES1ERLV LINE OF ·.,,_,!:u :-. '. ! r•ROF':;.~TV :!:_0;-:t-:;.. ·:Drml fiONS AND PROVISlllNS OF EASEMENT AGREEME.NT RECORDED .:.P~ 1.. ~. 1 '178 IN BOOK 2752 AT PAGE 7~0 . :.:.:.:>t:·~!:IIT AS ORANTED TO C:i:TY OF ENGLEwOOD . A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION IN :r ~~,p ,_..,Eq T R ~(.ORDED NOVE:"'iiER 13. 197-i IN &OOK 3117 AT PAGE 273. :..,:•:.H -lF wA ·v ~="OR EXISTING ROADS ACROSS SUBJECT PROPERTY AND -~-'1 ~{:. ~.::N r::. THEii EFORE . • I • - J I • • • • • C 0 U N C I L C 0 M M U N I C A T I 0 N DATE AGENDA ITEM March 9 1984 lilB SUBJECT Fund Transfer t o Urban Renewal Authority for Property Acquisitio n and A ~nn.,•rurHnn p,., ·• INITIATED BY Englewood Urban Renewal Authority ACT I ON PROPOSED Transfer the Current Balance of Little Dry Creek Funds in the Public Improvement Fund to the Urban Renewal Authority for Property Acquis ition and Reauired Construction INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND; The Englewood Downtown Redevelopment Plan (Urban Renewal Plan) has progressed to the point where construction of the initial stages of major public improvements, the Littl Dry Creek channel and Civic Center Boulevard, are being scheduled to comme nce in early summer. In order for this construction to begin, additional properties must be ac- quired by the Urban Renewal Authority to serve as right-of-way for the improvements. A project complementary to the downtown improvements mentioned above is the construc- tion of a retaining wall along Little Dry Creek adjacent to the new Safeway building along U. S. 285. Bids for this project have exceeded the engineer's estimates re- ported to City Council in a previous communication. Funds have been appropriated in the 1984 City Budget, specifically to the Public Im- provement Fund, for activities associated with the improvement of Little Dry Creek . Bonds have not, as yet, been issued by the Urban Renewal Authority to fund such public improvements and current construction schedules dictate an immediacy to the acquisitio of certain properties and the retaining wall construction. Best staff estimates of th cost of property acquisitioQ and retaining wall co nstruction indicate that the current balance of Little Dry Creek funds in the Public Improvement Fund should be transferred to the Authority. RECOMMENDATION: As requested in Resolution 04, Series of 1984, of the Urban Renewal Authority, it is recomme nded that the balance of the Public Improvement Fund for Little Dry Creek be transferred to the Urban Renewal Authority for land acquisition and construction • • I • • RESOLUTION NO. SERIES OF 1984 • • • CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO URBAN RENEWAL AUTHORITY 4 A RESOLUTION OF THE URBAN RENEWAL AUTHORITY REQUESTING THE ENGLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL TO TRANSFER THE CURRENT BALANCE OF LITTLE DRY CREEK FUNDS IN THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT FUND TO THE URB~N RENEWAL AUTHORITY FOR PROPERTV ACQUISITION AND REQUIRED CONSTRUCTION. WHEREAS, the Urban Renewal Authority has been designated by City Council as the agency responsible for the implementation of the adopted Downtown Redevelopment Plan (Urban Renewal Plan); and WHEREAS, key elements of Plan implementation are the acquisition of properties by the Authority and the construction of public improvements; and WHEREAS, properties needed in the near future for said public improvements have been identified by project engineers; and WHEREAS, a portion of the public improvement to Little Dry Creek has been identified as necessary to be completed immediately; and WHEREAS, bonds have not, as yet, been issued by the Authority to fund Redevelopment Project activities. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City of En glewood Urban Renewal Authority as follows: §_~tio!!_h Th e Englewood Urban Renewal Authority requests City Council to transfer the current balance of Little Dry creek funds in the Public Improvement Fund to the Authority for the acquisition of properties needed immediately for public improvement construction • • I • • - t : • Page 2 1984. ATTEST: • • • Section 2. The Englewood Urban Renewal Authority requests City Council to seek out additional sources of revenue which may be used by the Authority to implement the Downtown Redevelopment Plan until bonds are issued by the Authority. ADOPTED AND APPROVED THIS ___ 2~1.!_ __ DAY OF March ------------- aoaf~f1J~-IJ_filj:_ _____ _ Chairman ~ Motion by: ___ H:~~~~~----------------------------------- Seconded by: Susan Van _Elke · ___ __ Voting i n Opposition: __ Non~--------------------------------- Absen t : ___ ~~~vi c=k~y ___ ------------------------------ Ab sta in: None --------------------------------------- • I • • I - f : • • • • RESOLUTION NO. _ _:f::.__ __ Series of 1984 A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT FUND. WHEREAS, the City Council of Englewood, Colorado, adopted the Englewood Downtown Redevelopment Plan on August 23, 1982; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Englewood determined that the implementation of said Plan should be accomplished by the Englewood Urban Renewal Authority; and WHEREAS, certain acquisition and related activities are necessary at this time to further the progress of the Plan; and WHEREAS, the Englewood Urban Renewal Authority has requested through Resolution a transfer of funds to accomplish these activities consistent with the Plan. HOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Englewood, Colorado, that: ATTEST: Section 1. The following appropriation of funds is hereby made in the Public Improvement Fund: Application of Funds Little Dry Creek Englewood Urban Renewal Authority ($1,400,000) $1,400,000 Section 2. The City Manager and Director of Finance are hereby authorized to make the above changes to the 1984 budget of the City of Englewood. ADOPTED AND APPROVED THIS __ day of-------' 1984. Eugene L. Otis, Mayor Ex-officio City Clerk-Treasurer • I . J- I ~ /~ " • C 0 U N C I L DATE March 14, 1984 • • ,. • C 0 M M U N I C A T I Q N AGENDA ITEH SUBJECT "The Broadway" at Cinderella City -Utility Easement <DC. 1--------------L--=------~-------------------· ( INITIATED BY _______ E_n~g_le_w_o_o_d_W_a_t~e_r~a_n~d_S~e~w~e_r~B~o~a_rd~--------------------- ACTION PROPOSED _____ A~p~p_ro_v_e __ va_c_a_t_io_n __ o_f_t_h~e __ ex_i_s_t_in~g~w_at_e_r __ l,_·n~e~ea_s~e_me_n_t ____ __ and the concurrent dedication of thenew easement. BACKGROUND Kravco, Inc. is the project manager for "The Broadway" store construction at Cinderella City, and is requesting the abandonment of the existing water line easement and the granting of a new easement to provide access to the newly aligned water line. This is required to accomodate the expansion of Cinderella City located in the area of the old Neusteters store. FINANCIAL DETAILS None. RECOfot1ENDA TI ON To direct the City Attorney to prepare an ordinance for the vacation of the existing water line easement and the concurrent dedication of the new easement • I . • ~~ ... _;In • • • • I' I KRA'JCOINC January 3, 1983 Dorothy Romans Assistant Director of Community Development City of Englewood 3400 S. Elati Street Englewood, Colorado 80110 RE: The Broadway at Cinderella City Utility Easements Dear Mrs. Romans: Attached please find five (5) copies of legal descriptions and plot plans indicating the following actions required to acoomodate 'the expansion of Cinderella City. 1. The abandonment of existing storm sewer and water line ease- ments in the area of the proposed Broadway store. 2. The granting of a new easement to provide access to the newly aligned water line. I am requesting that you proceed with the process required for both the vacation or existing easements, and the dedication or the new easement concurrently. Please contact me if you have any questions or need additional information. Sincerely, ~ Project Manager EZ/rh Enclosure l !\ I I \,, " \ \. I ' ---~·,.,.,. lhe..num • 234 godderd llclullv..a p.o. bole 135 ldng of prWIII ...... ~114011 2151337·12!10 I • • • • • EASEMENTS TO BE ABANDONED I . . • • - • • • • • • BOOK 1807 PAGE 699 OF THE ARAPAHOE COUNTY RECORDS III. Line C -8" Diameter Water Main. Beginning at the point identified in the above descripti on for water main line "A" as the point of beginning of Lines "B" and "C"; thence Westerly an angle to the left of 90° 00'00" a distance of 195.1 feet to a point; thence South- westerly an angle to the lect of 45°00'00" parallel to and 10.0 feet Northwesterly of Column Line "HH" a distance of 411.4 feet to a point; thence Northwesterly an angle to the right of 90°00'00" parallel to and 10.0 feet Northeasterly of Column Line "16" a distance of 392.0 feet to a point; thence Northeasterly an angle to the right of 90°00'00" parallel to and 10.0 feet Southeasterly of Column Line "ZZ" a distance of 820.0 feet to a point; thence Easterly an angle to the right of 45°00'00" a distance of 503.0 feet to a point on line "A" referred to as point of ending lines "B" and "C". Including all f i re hydrants and services leading thereto • • I • • • • • • • BOOK 1607 PAGE 700 OF THE ARAPAHOE COUNTY RECORDS VII. Storm Sewer No. 1. Beginning at the Northeast corner of theSE~ of theSE -~ of Section 33, T. 4 S., R. 68 W. of the 6th P.M.; thence Westerly along the North line of said SE ~ of the SE ~ of Section 33 a distance of 240.3 feet to a point which is the true point of beginning; thence Southwesterly an angle to the left of 68°50'00" a distance of 12.95 feet to a point which is 6.0 feet Northeasterly of Column Line "42" and 16.0 feet Northwesterly of Column Line "CCC"; thence South- easterly an angle to the left of 36°50'00" a distance of 36.7 feet to a point which is 12.0 feet Southwesterly of Column Line "42" and 16.0 feet Northwesterly of Column Line "BBB"; thence Southwesterly an angle to the right of 60°40' 00" parallel to and 16.0 feet Northwesterly of Column Line "BBB" a distance of 594.0 feet to a point 4.0 feet North- easterly of Column Line "23"; thence Southerly an angle to the left of 45°00'00" a distance of 345.36 feet to a point which is 4.15 feet Southeasterly of Column Line "UU" and 16.0 feet Northeasterly of Column Line "15"; thence South- easterly an angle to the left of 45°00'00" parallel to and 16.0 feet Northeasterly of Column Line "15" a distance of 350.15 feet to a point which is 2.3 feet Southeasterly of Column Line "JJ"; thence Southeasterly an angle to the right of 35°00'00" a distance of 53.0 feet to a point; thence Southerly an angle to the right of 10°00'00" a distance of 134 .7 feet to a point on the North right of way line of West Hampden Avenue • • I • ' " • • • - ll EXHIBIT "e" • • v .I --I .. vi I . • • • • EASEMENT TO BE GRANTED I . • • • • • • I' Line C -8" Diameter Water Main. Beginning at the point identified in the easeftent description for water main line "A", (Book 1807, page 6Q9 of the Arapahoe County Records) as the point of beginning of Line "B" and "C"; thence Westerly an angle to the left of 90°00'00" a distance of 1Q5,1 feet to a point; thence Southwesterly an angle to the left of 45°00'00" parallel to and 10.0 feet Northwesterly of Column Line "HH" a distance of 524.4 feet to a point; thence Northwesterly an angle to the right of 90°00'00" parallel to and 25.0 feet Northwesterly of Column Line "12" a distance of 3Q6.0 feet to a point; thenc e Northeasterly an angle to the right of 90°00'00" parallel to and 10.0 feet Southeasterly of Column Line "ZZ" a distance of 933.0 feet to a point; thence Easterly an angle to the right of 45°00'00" a distance of 503.0 feet to a point on line "A" referred to as point of ending lines "B" and "C". Including all fire hydrants and services leading thereto. • I . • - • • ~. ~ e e.~7-e ~ ~ e ~@ If®@~~ e ® ~ l I ~ I ®- "f:'\. ...:1.1 , , (i) , 1.&/ ®-I J I ® J ~ E'XHIIJJr "A"' #~,. t;\. ~ -.:v ...:::"\. ·' >:!V I ®-I , I / ~ I' ~ .::y I I ~ I ~ ~I ~ I .:v u ~ :::> ..1! ~ U) i) ~15 ] ~ u~ ~ c j!!=-} '3' ~9 U) ... ~ 0 ~ I i • e<:U I lol II: :§} ~C> n-~ ~,~ cz AL :a-1-~ ® 9~ c '3' 0>< l1l ® uw I §} .. t ~DW ... Y :t .sourw~•T ~ • ~ Ia! ... ~~ -~~ lm dii) Q '" ~ ~ '~ ..f .rtU. I . • • • • ( • • • • C 0 U N C I L C 0 M M U N I C A T I 0 N DATE March 14, 1984 AGENDA ITEM (ob SUBJECT City Sewer System Analysis Community Center INITIATED BY ----~En~g~l~e~wnwo~d~Wa~t~e•r~awn~d~Se~wgp~r~Bo~aur~d------------------------ ACTION PROPOSED, ____ o_bt_a_i_n_in_g~a_p_r_o_p_os_a_l __ fr_om ___ B_la_c_k_& __ v_e_at_c_h __ to __ d_e_s,~·g~n ________ _ improvements to prevent overloading of the sewer system downstream of the Community Center. BACKGROUND The Community Center will be adding 140 gallons per minute sewer flow to the sewer system. The existing lines,which run north to Kenyon and then west across Santa Fe Drive,are either overloaded or will be overloaded when the Center opens. Black & Veatch Engineers are recommending the 10-inch sewer line in Windermere be replaced with a 12-inch sewer line. Regarding the 16-inch line which runs in Kenyon, one option would be to replace the line with a new 21-inch line which would flow at approximately 74% capacity. Another option would be to leave the existing sewer line and construct a parallel 15-inch sewer line. The two lines would then be flowing at approximately 83% capacity. A third option would be to let the line surcharge until the improvements are made to Santa Fe. At this time, a larger line could be constructed very economically. FINANCIAL To be negotiated. RECO,..ENDATION The Englewood Water and Sewer Board recommends City Council obtain a proposal from Black & Veatch to design improvements to prevent overloading of the sewer system downstream of the Community Center. It is the intent of the Board that either the City Manager or Council approve a contract acceptable to Council so that work can begin as soon as possible. • I . • ( • BLACK 81 VEATCH ENGINEERS-ARCHITECTS City of Englewood, Colorado Miscellaneous Consultation - City Sewer System Ms. Densel Ragland Civil Engineer City of Englewood 3400 South F.lati Street Englewootl, Colorado 80110 Dear Densel: • • • ATT. Co TEL. 13031 671·4200 DENVER REGIONAL OFFICE 1400 S . POTOMAC STREET-SUITE 200 A.._A. COLORAOO 80012 B&V Project 10790 B&V File A January 23, 1984 rR&:""ioTVEoJ I !..!:; E .J(.J:: {/J..~L ..... . BY ........ .t 0 . ____ ._·-_-_--_-·····.:.:::::.=-··· Based upon the information in your letter dated November 30, 1983, an additt.onnl pe<tk flow of 140 gpm from the Community Center etnptying into the existing manhole in the alley between Lipan and Kalamath Streets at Nassau Avenue would have the following results on your sewer system: 1. The existing 8-inch sewer line on Mansfield Avenue starting at the alley between Lipan and Mariposa Streets and ending in the manhole on Windermere Street will be at approximately 95 per cent of capacity. 2. Fl ows in the 10-inch sewer line which starts in the manhole at the intersection of Mansfield Avenue and Winderwere Street and goes generally north in Windermere Street, to the manhole at the intersection of Windermere and Kenyon Streets will range from approximately 100 to 133 per cent of the calculated capacity of this line. 3. Flows in the 16-inch sewer line that goes west frmn Windermere and Kenyon Streets to the manhole in Sante Fe Drive will be at approximately 129 per cent of the calculated capacity of this line. Presently, the flow in this 16-inch line is at approx- imately 120 per cent of the calculated capacity. • I • • (( • BLACK a VEATCH City of Englewood, Colorado Ms. Densel Ragland 2 • • • B&V Project 10790 January 23, 1984 We recommend that the 10-inch sewer line in Winderaere from .. nhole 1.41 to manhole 1.30, as shown on the attached sketch, be replaced with a 12-inch sewer line. This line should be constructed when the new Community Center is built. We recom.end two options for the City's consideration concerning the 16-inch line which runs in Kenyon fr<MI .. nhole 1. 30 to unhole 1.17. One option is that the existing 16-inch line be replaced with a new 21-inch line, which would then flow at approxiutely 74 per cent capacity. The other option would be to leave the existing 16-inch sewer line in place and construct a parallel 15-inch sewer line. These two lines would then flow at approximately 83 per cent capacity. The existing 16-inch line which runs from manhole 1. 30 to 1.17 is presently overloaded and the addition of the new Comaunity Center and other projected devel- opments would cause 1t to further exceed its capacity. The illlprovetacnts to this line should be made as soon as practicable, but should be coordinated '!'fth the proposed Santa Fe Corridor illlproveaents. Our recommendations are based on providing additional capacity for all lines in which the ultimate peak flow exceeds 120 per cent of the calculated capacity. The recommended improvements are based on the projected ultimate peak flows using a population estilllate of 60,000 for the City and the estimated peak flow of 140 gpm froa the Co.-unity Center. If you have any questions, please call. DGB:alh Enclosure& Very truly yours, BLACK 6 VEATCH ~~U-L Willia R. Jones • I • • - ( 't " "' • <::> ~ .{ ~ Ill u c IL en en X 1- z Ill 1- a: ~ t-o z 0 Q • CON8UL.TIN. IIN81NIIIIIa Ka,. .... c.,.,. • • • w~~;.c;;;tc;u:h~t'~:jP#z Aa*,,·. ~:;~?:v"/2~ '~/o8 ~ Wollth ··ewc'<'. Ci(e.;pc<(<rr af.JC • #lr"tipe, .al&wtAa,..,uu~r ('eurer co .. ~Tao 8 ,.. ____ _ -------~------------------~--~-------------------CHECKEDBY•----~- PAGK No_..._ __ ,g,_L_ = P'ltDJECT No .... t.,.Q'-"2.._90...._ ____ _ --I'ILE No _____ _ 1.30 /,/7 .;. ·A ----- JO"'. ·"·'" ~ ~.,.. . . 11 r¥0 , . 10 ··:·'.'!<yo •;; · .JrJ,. --\. LJ 1.'/.J ·' -----~· I ( I I >[~L-~ 1 1('. 5 ', .?'; ?.---. ,. '. I.W v L I .'/..) 'i I r La/,.!t._J, Pl~rr Y' 'II l:l -~ .. ~ ~4..4! ,.,.,J-us ,n p enc ,/ ' ____ /' ~ -~ C-3~ ~ -~ ->1 I ,, • L It/, ·~ C-7 ·, ;· A;;;,;;c"" ' c t/' ; .• -:/l"/, C-7 Js I I ~ ~ . -. J:)i, OA T nf"""':JI. &It fr tr,w e.t.~r.,PIIlt'r ,PI'InfDwf "'b.······· I • • ' • • • C 0 U N C I L C 0 M M U N I C A T I 0 N DATE March 14, 1984 AGENDA ITEM (DE. SUBJECT INITIATED BY The Englewood Parks and Recreation Commission ACT I ON PRO PO SED __ .:..:A~p~p.:.r.:.o..:."'.:.a.:.l....:o::.;f:....:P..:r..:o:!po=s..:e:::d....:.:.N.:.am::e:_f:.:o:::r:.....:N::ew:::.....:E::.n:..::g..:l:::e::"':::ood.::.:._c::o:::mm=u=n.::~:.:· t:..;y~C:..:e:::n:..:t::e:.r At their regular monthly meeting of March 8, 1984, the Englewood Parks and Recreation Commission made a recommendation in the form of a motion to name the new community center "The Englewood Recreation Center". This name was chosen from two alternatives that were submitted by members of the Commission: 1) The Englewood Recreation Center; and 2) The Englewood Community and Recreation Center. • • I • • • • • • C 0 U N C I L C 0 M M U N I C A T I 0 N DATE AGENDA ITEM SUBJECT (A~ BUILDI NG CON SULTA NT CONTRACT INITIATED BY Library Advisory Board ACT I ON PROPOSED Ap prove award of contract and appropriate necessary monies INTRODUCTION At its meeting of March 13, 1984, the Library Advisory Board accepted the Report of the Library Planning Committee signifying David R. Smith as consultant of choice for the proposed library facility. The Board therefore recommends that City Council approve awa r d of the contract to David R. Smith and appropriate the related funds to the Library Department. BACKGROU ND The City Manager and City Council have requested that the Library Board and Library staff prepare a building program for use by an architectural firm in preparing plans for the proposed library facility . The Library Board and Library staff believe the hiring of an experienced library building consultant to help with this process to be in the best interest of the City and its citizens. FINANCIAL: The Library Planning Committee which is composed of 6 staff members and two Board members interviewed representatives from two library building consulting firms in late February and early ~larch. These firms and the project cost detailed in their proposals appear below: · HBW Associated, Inc. $28 ,404.01 David R. Smith $13,980.00 The cost related to the David R. Smith contract would be expended over a two-year period as follows: 1984: 1) Prepare comprehensive Library Bldg. Program 2) Review facility plans prepared by architect 3) Review of fixtures & finishings 1984 Total 1985: 4) Provision of long-term maintenance schedule 6) Review of actual construction 7) Recommendation regarding staffing levels 1985 Total Optional activity 9) Architect Selection Grand Total • $7,190 4,305 i ncluded in 112 $11,495 350 835 550 $1,735 750 $13,980 I • • - . . . \...._, • • • • RECOMMENDED ACTION: The Library Advisory Board recommends that City Council approve award of contract to David R. Smith and appropriate $13,980.00 to the Library Department in 1984 to be expended over the life of the project. SUGGESTED ACTION: MOVED BY SECOND YES NO BSENT I • - • • • • • 7 A~ BY AIJI'HORITY ORDINAOCE NO. I I SERIFS OF 198..,.4__;_..:......._ CCXJtCIL BILL NO. 11 IN'l'RCXXX:ID BY COOtCIL ME}1BER BRAOOHAW AN ORDINAOCE APPROVIt«; AN AGREEMmr WI'lli 'mE METROPOLITAN DOWER SDlAGE DISPOSAL DISTRICT NO. 1 PROVIDit«; FOR SPR:IAL CXHIFX:TOR STA'IUS FOR 'mE CITY OF ~. WHEREAS, a certain portion of northeast Englewood lies in the drainage systEII\ that more econanically an:! conveniently drains sewage into the Metropolitan Denver Sewage Disposal District No. 1 systEIIl; an:! WHEREAS, the expense to the City of Englewood in P\.lllPing an:! transferring the sewage to another drainage systEIIl makes said pmping an:! transfer uneconanical; ~. 'nfEREFORE, BE IT ClRD.\INID BY 'mE CITY CCXJtCIL OF 'lliE CITY OF ~. as follows: Section 1. That City Council of the City of Englewood hereby approves that docl.l'llel'lt titled "Metropolitan Denver Sewage Disposal District No. 1 SPEX:IAL ~RS AGRDMF.Nr CITY OF~" pursuant to the terms and conditions thereof, a copy of which is attached hereto, marked Exhibit A, and incorporated herein by reference. Section 2. The Mayor and the ex officio City Clerk-Treasurer are herebY authorized to sign said Agreement for and on behalf of the City Council an:! the City of Englewood. Introduced, read in full, an:! passed on first reading on the 5th day of March, 1984. 1984. Published as a Bill for an Ordinance on the 7th day of March, Read by title an:! passed on final reading on the 19th day of March, 1984. • I • • - ( ' • • • • Published by title as Ordinance No. , Series of 1984, on 21st day of March, 1984. --- Attest: Eugene L. ot1s, Mayor ex off.lcio C1ty Clerk-Treasurer I, Gary R. Higbee, ex officio City Clerk-Treasurer of the City of Fnglewood, Colorado, hereby certify that the above and foregoing is a true, accurate and canplete copy of the Ordinance passed on final reading and ~lished by title as Ordinance No. , Series of 1984. --- Gary R. Hlgbee • I • • • • • Metropolitan Denver Sewage Disposal District No. 1 SPECIAL CONNECTORS AGREEMENT CITY OF ENGLEWOOD EXHIBIT "A" I . . • • • • ,. • SPECIAL CONNECTORS SEWAGE TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL AGREEMENT ENGLEWOOD (herein sometimes referred to as the Special Connector Agreement) MADE AND DATED as of the ---day of ------• 19 __ , by and between the METROPOLITAN DENVER SEWAGE DISPOSAL DISTRICT NO. 1 (herein sometimes referred to as the "District"), a public body politic and corporate, a quasi-municipal district, and a governmental and politi- cal subdivision of the State of Colorado (herein sometimes referred to as the "State"), and the CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, Colorado (herein referred to as a "Special Connector," a public body politic and corporate, a municipal or quasi-municipal corporation, and a governmental and political subdivision of the State). WHEREAS, the District, now situate in the Counties of Adams, Arapahoe, Jefferson and the City and County of Denver, within the State, was duly organized on the 15th day of May, 1961, under what is now Title 32, Article 4, Part 5 of the Colorado Revised Statutes 1973, as from time to time amended, and its officers from time to time have been duly chosen and qualified; and WHEREAS, on the first day of January, 1964, the District entered into a Sewage Treatment and Disposal Agreement with certain municipalities to provide sewage treatment and disposal which agreement is still in full force and effect; and WHEREAS, the District has -the power: (a) To fix and from time to time to increase or to decrease rents, rates, fees, tolls, and other charges to the Special Connector for connection with or use of services of the District's System, including minimum charges and charges for availability of service (herein sometimes designated as "Service Charges"): (b) To pledge such revenue for the payment of any securities of the District; (c) To borrow money in anticipation of revenues, to issue notes to evidence the amount so borrowed, to secute their payment by a pledge of revenues of the District, including, without limiting the generality of the foregoing, proceeds of bonds to be issued or reissued hereafter, and to issue and to pledge bonds as·collateral security for the payment of the notes; and • I • • ' • • • • - WHEREAS, the District was organ i zed for the acqui sition, opera- tion, and maintenance of a Sewage Disposal System for the interception from Municip a lities, transportation, treatment, purification a nd disposal of sewage and industrial wastes in an efficient and economical manner ; and WHEREAS, th e Di strict has sewage treatment works ., interceptor sewers and appurtenances thereto; and WHEREAS, the District also has the power: (1) To enter , without an elect i on, into joint operating or serv- ice contracts and agreements, acquisition, improvement or disposal con- tracts, or other arrangements for any term not exceeding fifty (50) years with any Municipality or person concerning sewage facilities, sewers, sewer system, intercepting sewers, project or sewage disposal system, and any water and water rights appertaining thereto , whether acquired by the District, or by any public body or other person, and to accept grants and contributions from any public body or other person in connection there- with; and when determined by the Board to be in the pub! ic interest and necessary for the protection of the pub! ic health, to enter into and to perform, without an e 1 ect ion, contracts and agreements for any term not exceeding fifty (50) years with any Municipality or person for the provi- sion and operation by the District of sewage facilities, sewers, sewer system, intercepting sewers, project or sewage disposal system to abate or· reduce the pollution of waters or other nuisance caused by discharges of sewage, 1 iquid wastes, solid wastes, night soil, and industrial wastes by the Municipality or person and the payment periodically by the Municipal- ity or person to the District of amounts at least sufficient, in the de- termination of the Board, to compensate the District for the cost of pro- viding, operating, and maintaining the sewage facilities, sewers, sewer system, intercept in g sewers, project or sewage disposal system serv ing such Municipal i ty or person; and (2) To enter and perform, without an election, contracts and agreements with any Municipality or person for or concerning the planning, construction, lease, or other acquisition, operation, maintenance, im- provement, equipment, disposal, and the financing of any project, includ- ing but not necessarily limited to any contract or agreement for any term not exceeding fifty (50) years; and WHEREAS, the Special Connector similarly has the power so to contract with the District; and WHEREAS, the District cannot f.i nance on satisfactory terms the acquisition, operation, and maintenance of the Sewage Disposal System, un- less the District treats and disposes of the sewage from the Sewer System of the Special Connector and unless the Special Connector is legally bound to accept and to pay for such sewage treatment and disposal service by the D1str1 ct; and WHEREAS, the District and the Special Connector desire to pro- vide for financing the District's monetary and budget requirements from time to time by contract prov i ding for annual charges (herein sometimes referred to as "Annual Charges ") to be paid by the Special Connector as herein provided, in lieu of Ser~ice Charges unilaterally fixed, charged, -2- • I • • • • • and collec ted by the District independent of any such contract (excluding any Service Charges appertaining only to any Interceptors), and otherwise ap perta ining to the District's Sewage Disposal System and to the Sewer System of the Special Connector; and WHEREAS, the District and the Special Connector have determined to enter in to this Agreement for the aforesaid purpose. NOW, THEREFORE , THIS AGREEMENT WITNESSETH: That in cons ide ration of the premises, of the mutual covenants and agreements herein set forth, and of the undertakings of each party to the others, and in order to secure the payment of the operation and main- tenance expenses of the District, the payment of the principal of and the interest on the bonds and other obligations of the District heretofore or hereafter i ssued or otherwise incurred, and the payment of any other fi- nancial obligations of the District, the parties hereto, each binding it - self, its respective representatives, successors, and assigns, do mutually COVENANT, UNDERTAKE, PROMISE, AND AGREE, as follows: ARTICLE 1 SHORT TITLE, DEFINITIONS, AND INTERPRETATIONS Section 101. Short title. This Agreement may be referred to as the "Special Connectors Agreement" (herein sometimes designated as the "Agreement"). Section 102. Meanings and Constructions. A. Definitions. The terms in this section defined for all purposes of this Agreement and of any agreement amendatory hereof or sup- plemental hereto or re 1 at i ng hereto, and of any instrument or document apperta ining hereto, except where the context by clear implication other- wise requires, shall have the meanings herein specified: (1) "Acquire" or "Acquisition" means the purchase, construction, reconstruction, lease, gift, transfer, assignment, option to purchase, or grant from the Federal Government, any public body or other person, endow- ment, bequest, devise, installation, condemnation, other contract, or other acquirement (or any combination thereof) of facilities, other prop- erty, any project, or an interest therein, as authorized by the Act. (Z) "Ac t" means the act govern in g .the District and authorizing this Agreement, which act is co11111only designated as the "Metropolitan Sewage Disposal Districts Act of Colorado," was adopted as Chapter 55, Sessions Laws of Colorado 1960, was reenacted as Title 32, Article 4, Part 5, Colo- rado Revised Statutes 1973, as amended • (3) "Alter" or "Alteration" appertains to any structure or other Fa- cility which is not completed as a part of the Project or to any enlarge- ment or change of structure or other Facility which enlargement or change is not completed as a part of the Project, but does not include an Exten- sion, a reconstruction, replacement, or repair of a part of the System acquired as the Project, nor does it include an enlargement or change of the sewage treatment plant acquired as part of the Project. -3- • I • • - ( • • • • ( 4) "Annual Budget" means the budget or the amended budget for a tiscal Year and adopted by the District or in effect pursuant to Section 501 hereof. (5) "Annual Charges" means the sums paid or becoming payable to the District pursuant to this Agreement and pur su ant to any agreement supple- mental thereto. {6) "B oard" or Board of Directors" the District. means the board of directors of (7) "Bond Question" means the question authorizing the issuance of the District's sewer acquisition bonds and submitted to the electors of the District at any special bond election. (B) "Bond Year" means the twelve (12) months conmencing the second day of April in any year and ending on the first day of April of the next succeeding year. (9) "Charge" means either an Annual Charge or a Service Charge payable to the District by a Special Connector. {10) "Clerk" means the clerk, secretary, or other official of a Special Connector who performs duties ordinarily performed by a city clerk, town clerk, or secretary of a corporation. (11) "C ost of the Project," or any phrase of similar import, means, in addition to the usual connotations thereof, the cost of Acquisition and equipment of all or any part of the Sewage Disposal System for the Dis- trict and of all or any property, rights, easements, privilege, agree- ments, and franchise deemed by the District to be necessary or useful and convenient therefor or in connect ion therewith, i ncl udi ng interest or discount on bonds, costs of issuance of bonds, engineering and inspection costs and legal expense, cost in financial, professional, and other esti- mates and advice, contingencies, any administrative, operating, and other expenses of the District prior to and during such Acquisition. {12) "Debt Service" means, as of any particular date or cornputat ion and with respect to a particular Bond Year, i.e. the twelve (12) month period beginning on the second day of April in any Fiscal Year and ending on the first day of April in the next succeeding Fiscal Year, an amount of money equal to the aggregate of the following: (a) All interest payable during the Bond Year on all bonds and other securities of the District outstanding on the date of computa- tion, and (b) The principal amount of all bonds and other securities of the District outstanding on the date of computation which mature during the Bond Year, and (c) All reasonable amounts required for deposits into any reserve account or reserve fund created. accumulated, and maintained as a continuing reserve to prevent deficiencies in the payment of the principal of and the interest on any outstanding securities of the -4- • I • • ( • • • • Dist r ic t resultin g from the failure to deposit sufficient funds to pay said principal and interest as the same accrue, a ll ca l c ul ated on the assumption that the bonds will after the date of compu tation cease to be outstanding by reason, but only by reason, of the pa ym e nt of the principal thereof at maturity. (13) "D istrict " means the metropolitan sewage disposal district des- i gnated as the "Metropolitan Denver Sewage Disposal District No. 1," a pub li c body politic and corporate and a governmental subdivision of the State, also constituting a quasi-municipal district and a political subdi- vision of the State, established as an instrumentality exercising public and essential governmental and proprietary functions to provide for the public health, safety, and general welfare, formed under and governed by the provisions of the Act, and situated in the Counties of Adams, Arapa- hoe, Jefferson and the City and County of Denver, and State of Colorado, with all the powers, privileges, immunities, rights, liabilities, disabil- ities, and duties provided by the Act; and the term means any municipal corporation succeeding to the rights of the District. (14) "District Officer" means any one of the Chairman, Chairman Pro Te rn , Secretary, or Treasurer of the Board and of the District. (15) "Extend" or "Extension " means the installation of any new inter-· ceptor or other sewer main, which installation extends the System to a Municipality which hereafter is served by the Oistrict. (16) "Facility" means any of the works or other properties, or any interest therein, appertaining to the "System," as herein defined, or to a "Sewer System," as herein defined. (17) "Federal Government" means the United States of America or any agency, instrumentality, or corporation thereof. (18) "Fiscal Year" means the twelve (12) months co11111encing on the first day of January of any year and ending on the last day of December of the same year. ( 19) "Genera 1 Fund " means the "Metropolitan Denver Sewage Oi sposa 1 , District No. 1, Colorado, General Fund," created i n Section SOl of the 5-1-82 Bond Resolution, adopted by the Board. {20) "Gross i ncome," "gross revenues," "income," or "revenues " from the System means all income and revenues derived by the District from the operation of the Sewage Disposal System, or any part thereof, whether re- sulting from Improvements, Extensions, Alterations, enlargements, repairs, or betterments thereto, or otherwise, and includes a 11 revenues received by the District or by any municipal corporation succeed i ng to the r i ghts of the District from the System and from the sale and use of sewer service and sewerage facilities, or any combination thereof. (21) "Hereby," "herein," "hereinafter," "hereinbefore," "hereof," "hereto," "hereunder," and any similar term, refer to th i s Agreement and not solely to the particular portion thereof in which such word i s u sed ; "heretofore" means before the s~ated date of this Agreement; and "here- after" means after the stated date of this Agreement. -5- • I • ( ( ( • • • - (22) "I mprove " or "Improveme nt" mea ns the Ex tens ion , Alteration, bet- terment, reconstr uct i on, replacement, repair, or other im provement (or any co mbin at ion th ere of) of facilities, other property, an y project, or an in terest therein , as authorized by the Act. (23) "Income " means "gros s inc ome," as herein def in ed. (24) "Independent Accountant" means any certified public accountant or any firm of such certified public accounta nts, duly licensed to prac- tice and practi c ing as such under the 1 aws of the State, appo inted and paid by the Di str ict : (a) Who is, in f act, in dependent and not under the dominat ion of the District, (b) Hho does not have any substantia 1 interest, direct or i nd i- rect, with the Distri ct, a nd (c) Who i s not connected with the District as an officer or employee of the District but who may be regularly retained to make ann ua l or similar audits of the books or the records of the District. (25) "Interceptor" means any one of the intercepting sewers and the out fall sewers be ing necessary or proper to intercept and to transport the outfalls fr om the Sewer Systems of the Special Connector. (26) "Municipal Officer" means any one of the following : Mayor, City Manager, if any, City Clerk, City Treasurer, Chairman, and any manager of a Special Connector Sewer System. (27) "Municip a lity" means any city, city and county, incorporated town, sanitation district, water and sanitat i on district, or any other po l itical subdivision or public entity heretofore or hereafter created unoer the l aws of the State of Colorado (other than a metropolitan sewage disposal district), having spec ific boundaries within which it is author- ized or empowered to provide sewer service for the area within its bounda- ries which at the time of enter ing into of this Agreement are a component part of the District and entitled to representation on the Board . (28) "Net i ncome " or "net revenues " means the revenues after deduct- ing Operation and Maintenance Expenses. ( 29) "Operation and Ma i ntenance Expenses," or any phrase of sim il ar import, means a 11 reasonab 1 e and necessary current expenses of the Dis- trict, paid or accrued, of operating, maintaining, and repairing the Sewage Disposal System; and the term may i nclude at the District's option (except as limited by law), without li miting the generality of the fore- going, engineering, auditing, legal, and other overhead expenses of the District directly related to the administration, operation , and mainten- ance of the System, insurance and surety bond premiums, the reasonable charges of any paying agent or other depository bank appertaining to the System, or bonds, other securities or other obligations of the District, payments to pension, retirement, health , and hospitalization funds, any taxes, assessments, or other charges which may be lawfully imposed on th e District or its income or ope~ations of facilities under its contro l , -6- • I • • - ( ( • • • - ordinary and current rentals of equipment or other property, refunds of any revenues lawfully due to others, including but not limited to refunds to Municipalities or Special Connectors, expenses in connection with the issuance of bonds or other obligations evidenc ing any loan to the Dis- trict, the expenses and compensation of any trustee or other fiduciary, contractual services, professional services required by this Agreement, or otherwise, salaries, labor, and the cost of materials and supplies used for current operation, and all other administrative, general, and comner- c i al expenses, but exc luding any allowance for depreciation or any re- serves for capital replacements, excluding any reserves for operation, maintenance, or repair of the System, excluding any allowance for the redemption of any note, bond, or other obligation evidencing a loan, or the paym ent of any interest thereon, excluding liabilities incurred by the District as the result of its negligence in the operation of the System or other ground of 1 ega 1 1 i ability not based on contract, and excluding the costs of Improv ements, Extensions, or Alterations. (30) "P erson " means not only a natural person, corporation, or other legal entity, but also two or more natural persons, corporations, or other legal entities acting jointly as a firm, partnership, unincorporated asso- ciation, joint adventurers, or otherwise. (31) "Project" means the construction, installation, and other Acqui- sition of the Sewage Disposal System for the District, including, withou~ limiting the generality of the foregoing, a sewage treatment plant, sewage treatment works, intercepting sewers, outfall sewers, force mains, water 1 i nes, pumping plants or stati ens, and appurtenances useful or convenient for the interception, transportation, treatment, purification, or disposal of sewage and industrial wastes, and all necessary lands, interest in lands, easements, and water rights, and any other Cost of the Project, as authorized by the Act and by the Bond Question; and the Project may be re- ferred to as such, or as "con structing, installing, and otherwise acquir- ing the System," or words of similar import. ( 32) "Project Engineer" means any registered or 1 i censed profess i anal eng in eer, or firm of such engineers, or an association thereof, having a wide and favorable repute for skill and experience in the field of design- ing, preparing plans and specifications for, and supervising construction of sanitary sewer systems and facilities, entitled to practice and prac- ticing as such under the laws of the State, selected, retained, and com- pensated by the District, but not in · the regular employ or control of the District, except that with respect to construction on the System for which the construction drawings and specifi cat i ens have been prepared by Dis- trict employees working on force account or otherwise under the super- vision of the District's Engineer, this term may incude the District's Engineer, including without limitation any successor of the present asso- ciation of firms now constituting the Project Engineer. Any Project Engi- neer may also be Consulting Engineer. (33) "Rate Schedule" means the schedule of the methods for the deter- mination of Service Charges and of the rates for their allocation. {34) "Redemption Price," when used with respect to a bond, means the principal amount of such bond plus any applicable premium payable upon the redemption thereof prior to its stated maturity date in the manner contem- plated in accordance with its terms, -7- • I • • ( ( ( • • • • (35) "Revenue" means "g ross income," as herein defined. (36) "R evenue Fund" means the "Metropolitan Denver Sewage Disposal District No. 1, Colorado, System Gross Revenue Fund," created in Section 5D1 of the 9-1-77 Bond Resolution, adopted by the Board. (37) "Secretary " means the person chosen by the Board as Secretary of the Board and the [)istrict, which person may be (but is not necessarily) a member of the Board and may be (but is not necessarily) the same person as the Treasurer •. (38) "Secretary of State" means the secretary of state of the State of Colorado. (39) "Se rv ice Charges" me ans rents, rates, fees, tolls, and other charges for direct or indirect connection with or the use of services of the Sewage Disposal System, including, without limiting the generality of the foregoing, minimum charges and charges for the availability of serv- ice, which Service Charges the District is or may be authorized to fix, charge, and collect from any Municipality or person independent of this or any other contract, pursuant to subsection (m) of Section 32-4-510 and to Section 32-4-522 of the Act. (40) "Service Contract" means that contract between the District and certain municipalities dated the first day of January, 1964, but actually executed on the 30th day of March, 1964 denominated as the "Sewage Treat- ment and Disposal Agreement" as it has been from time to time amended. ( 41) "Sewage" means 1 i quid wastes, so 1 i d wastes, night soi 1, indus- trial wastes, any other substance, whether it be liquid, solid, in suspen- sion, or in solution, in a Sewer System or in the Sewage Disposal System, or in both such systems. (42) "Sewage Disposal System" or "System" means the sanitary sewer and other sanitation facilities to be constructed, installed, and other- wise acquired by the District, initially as the Project, and as thereafter modified. (43) "S ewer System" means a system provided by a Municipality or a Special Connector to provide sewer service to its inhabitants by the col- lection of sewage arising within its corporate limits and to the extent determined by its governing body without its corporate 1 imits and by treating and by disposing of such sewage to the extent of the adequacy of existing facilities of the Municipality or Special Connector, as deter- mined and approved by the regula tory agency of the State having juris- diction. ( 44) "Spec i a 1 Connector" means any city, incorporated town, sanita- tion district, water and sanitation district, special district, or any other political subdivision or public entity heretofore or hereafter created under the laws of the State of Colorado, including a metropolitan sewage disposal district, having specific boundaries within which it is authorized or empowered to provide sewer service for the area within its boundaries, which is not a member of the District. Special Connectors shall not be entitled to representation on the Board of Directors. -8- • I • • ( • • • • (45} "State " means the State of Colorado. (46} "System" means "Sewage Disposal System." (47} "Taxes" means general (ad valorem) taxes as authorized to be levied against all taxable property in the District by the Act. (48} "Treasurer" means the person chosen by the Board as Treasurer of the Board and the District, which person may be (but is not necessarily) a member of the Board and may be (but is not necessarily} the same person as the Secretary. B. Construction. This Agreement, except where the context by clear implic ation herein otherwise required, shall be construed as fol- 1 ows: (1) Definitions include both singular and plural. (2) Pronouns include both singular and plural and cover all genders. (3) Articles, sections, subsections, paragraphs, and subpara- graphs mentioned by number, letter or otherwise, correspond to the respective articles, sections, subsections, paragraphs, and subpara- graphs of this Agreement so numbered or otherwise so designated. Section 103. Successors. Whenever herein the District or any Special Connector is named or is referred to, such provision shall be deemed to include the successors of the District or the Special Connector, respectively, whether so expressed or not. All of the covenants, stipula- tions, obligations, and agreements by or on behalf of and other provisions for the benefit of the District or any Special Connector contained herein shall bind and shall inure to the benefit of any officer, board, district, commission, authority, agent or instrumentality to whom or to which there sha 11 be transferred by or in accordance with 1 aw any right, power, or duty of the District or the Special Connector, respectively, or of its successor, the possession of which is necessary or appropriate in order to comply with any such covenants, stipulations, obligations, agreements, or other provisions hereof. Section 104. Parties Interested Herein. Nothing herein expres- sed or i mplied i s intended or shall be construed to confer upon or to give to any person or corporation, other thafl the District Associate and Con- necting Mun i cipalities as defined i n the Service Contract and the Special Connector, any trustee for. and any holder of any note, bonds, or other securities of the Di strict, and the coupons thereunto appertaining, if any, any right, remedy, or claim under or by reason hereof or any cove- nant, condition, or stipulation hereof. All the covenants, stipulations, promises, and agreements herein contained by and on behalf of the District shall be for the sole and exclusive benefit of the District, the aforesaid Mun i cipalities, the Special Connector, any such trustee, and any holder of any such note bonds, other secur i ties, and the coupons thereunto apper- taining, if any. -9- • I • • • • • • ARTICLE II OPERAT I ON OF THE SYSTEM Section 201. Acquisition and Purpose. The Oi st rict will oper- ate, maintain, and en la rge the System so as to receive, to treat, an d to dispose of sewage, which may thereafter be del i vered into the System by any Special Connector in accordance with this Agreement. Section 202. Extensions and Alterations. The District may at any time enlarge or modify the System or renew or rep la ce any part thereof and may construct or otherwise Acquire any Extens i on or Alteration, as may be feasible and then be permitted by law. Section 203. Perfonn1ng Duties. The District will faithfully and punc tua lly perform all duties with respect to t he System required by the Constitution and l a 1~s of the State and the resolutions of the Di s- tr ict , including bu t not limit ed to the ma king and collecting of reason- ab l e and suff icient rates and charges for services rendered or furn i shed by the System, and the proper segregation of the revenues of the System and their applicat i on to the respective funds prov i ded from time to time therefor. Sim il arly the Special Connector will so perform all duties with respect to it s Sewer System required by the Constitution and la1~s of the State, by ordinances or resolution of the Special Connector, and by resolutions of the District, as pe r mi tted by law, including but not limited to the prompt payment of Annual Charges. Section 204. Operation and Maintenance of System. The District shall at al l times op e rate the System properly and in a sound and economi - cal manner and sha 11 maintain, preserve, and keep the same proper ] y or cause the same to be so maintained , preserved, and kept, with the appurte- nances and every part and parcel in good repair, order, and condition, and shall from time to ti me mak e or c a use to be ma de a ll necessary and proper repa i rs, replacements , and renewals so that at all times the operation of the System may be properly and advantageously conducted, Sect i on 205. Rules, Regulations, and Other Details. The Dis- trict shall estab lish and enforce reasonable rules and regulations govern- ing the operat ion, use and services of the System, All compensation, salaries, fees, and wages paid by it in connection with the maintenance, repair, and operation of the System shall be reasonable and comparable to payments by other corporations, Municipalities, or public bodies for simi- lar services, The D1strict shall observe and perform all of the terms and conditions contained in the Act and shall comply with all valid acts, rules, regulations, orders, and directions of any legislative, executive, administrative, or judicial body applicable to the System or to the Dis-trict. Section 206. Pa~ent of Lawful Govern.ental Charges. The Dis- trict shall pay all municipal or governmental charges, if any, lawfully levied or assessed upon or in. respect of the System or upon any part -10- • I • • • • • ,. • thereof or upon any revenue therefrom, when the same shall become due, and shall duly observe and comply with all valid requirements of any municipal or governmental authority relative to any part of the System and shal l not create or suffer to be created any 1 ien or charge upon the System or any part thereof or upon the revenues therefrom, except the pledge and 1 ien created by any resolution for the payment of the principal and redemption price of and the interest on the bonds and other securities of the Dis- trict. The District shall pay or shall cause to be discharged or will make adequate provision to satisfy and to discharge, within sixty (60) days after the same shall become payable, all lawful claims and demands for labor, materials, supplies, or other object which if unpaid might by 1 aw become a 1 i en upon the System or any part therof or the revenues therefrom; provided , h011ever, that nothing in this Section 206 contained shall require the District to pay or to cause to be discharged or to make provision for any such 1 ien or charge so long as the validity thereof shall be contested in good faith and by appropriate legal proceedings. Section 207. Insurance and Reconstruction. The District shall at all times maintain with responsible insurers all such insurance reason- ably required and obtainable within limits and at costs deemed reasonable by the District as is customarily maintained with respect to sewerage sys- tems of 1 ike character against 1 ass of or damage to the System, against loss of revenues, and against public and other liability to the extent at least reasonably necessary to protect the interests of the District ana the Special Connector and also all such insurance as is required to indem- nify and to save harmless the Special Connector against all liabilities, judgments, costs, damages, expenses, and attorneys' fees for loss, damage, or injury to person or property resulting from the operation or a failure of operation of the System caused by the negligence or willful act of the District, District Officers, employees, or any other agents. Any liabil- ity incurred by the Oistrict as a result of the operation of its System shall be its so l e liability, and any liability incurred by the Special Connector as a result of the operation of its Sewer System shall be its sole liability, subject to any agreement to the contrary now existing or hereafter made. If any useful part of the System shall be damaged or destroyed, the District shall as expeditiously as may be possible commence and diligently prosecute the repair or replacement of the damaged property so as to restore the same to use. The proceeds of any insurance apper- taining thereto shall be payable to the District and (except for proceeds of use and occupancy insurance) shall be appl i ed to the necessary costs involved in such repair and replacement and, to the extent not so applied, shall (together with proceeds of any such use and occupancy insurance) be deposited by the Oistrict as revenues of the System. In the event that the costs of such repair and replacement of the damaged property exceed the proceeds of such i nsurance available for payment o f the same, moneys i n the General Fund or the Operation and Ma i ntenance Reserve Fund, or both such accounts, as the Di strict may determine, sha 11 be used to the extent necessary for such purposes. Sect 1 on 208. Ali en at i ng Systen~. change, or lease at any time and from time to ties constituting part of the System and not reconstruction, or operation thereof. -11- • The Dis tr i ct may sell, ex- time any property or facili- useful in the construction, I • • • • • • • •' • Section 209. Records, Accounts and Audits. The District shall keep proper books of record and accounts (separate from all other records and accounts), in which complete and correct entr ies shall be made of its transactions relating to the System or any part thereof and which, to- gether with all other books and papers of the Di strict, shall at all reasonable times be subject to the inspection of at l east any member of t he Board and any Municipal Offic er. The District shall cause its books and accounts to be audited annually by an Independent Accountant se lected by the District. ARTICLE II 1 GE ERAL PROVISION S CONCERNING SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM Section 301. Tributary Sewer Syste~~s. In general, connection to the System of the Di strict shall be made on ly at the connection points provided herein, or as approved by the District; sha 11 be I imi ted to the Sewer Systems owned, operated, or controlled by the Special Connector; and sha ll be metered or otherwise measured at the discretion of the District. The District may make provision at each po int of connection li sted in Ex- hibit A hereof for measurement of quantity and for sampling. Connections including facilities for measurement of quantity and for sampling, when- ever requ1red by the District , shall be made at the expense of the Special Connector. The Special Connector shall require and enforce conformity to these regulations with respect to the tributary system and its parts and, where applicable, with respect to individual contributors or groups of contr ibutors thereto . Only sewage from separate sanitary systems shall be discharged into the System, subject to the provisions of Section 406 thereof. Local sanitary systems shall receive no stormwater directly or indirectly from surface dra ins, ditches or streams, storm or combined sewers, roof , areaway. or foundation dra 1 ns , or from any other mea ns , except that the minimum practicable infiltration of groundwater (in any case not to exceed 200 gallons per inch diameter per mile per twenty-four {24) hours with a maximum of 8,400 gallons per twenty-four {24) hours per mile of sewer) will be permitted. All trunk, sub-trunk, or lateral sewers and appurtenant structures compris ing local tributary systems constructed after the date of this Agreement shall be of adequate strength to resist breakage and shall be substantially watert ight. Pipe 1 i nes. inc 1 ud i ng without limitation house and building connections, shall be of such mater- ial as to minimize initial and future infiltration, and all such pipe shall be properly bedded or cradled and constructed using tight joints of type, materials, and workmanship which will minimize infiltration. Section 302. Connections to Syste11. Upon written approval of the District, the Special Connector will permit its Sewer Systems or the outfalls therefrom to be connected with the District's Sewage Disposal System at the point or points designated in "Exhibit A" attached hereto and by this reference made a part hereof, or at such other point or points upon which the Special Connector and the District may mutually agree. Every connection listed in Exhibit A shall be made by the Special Connec- tor at its own expense and cost, and all other approved connections shall be made at the expense of the Special Connector. Every such connection -12- • I • • - • • • • • shall constitute and shall be operated by the District as part of its Sew- age Disposal System and shall include such facilities as may be necessary to cause all sewage delivered at said point or points of connection to be discharged into the System and be so made and be so constructed as to dis- charge into the System all sewage collected in its Sewer System and deliv- ered at said point or points of connection. The Special Connector at its own expense and cost will construct, install, and operate any and all ex- tensions of its Sewer System or the outfalls therefrom necessary to cause the s~me to reach to and to deliver sewage at said point or points of con- nection and after the making of such connection or connections, will keep its Sewer System connected with the System and will deliver and discharge into the System all sewage originating in and collected by the Special Connector except as herein other1~ise provided expressly or by necessary implication. Section 303. Service Rendered by the District and by the Special Connector. The Distrit..t's Sewage Disposal System shall intercept, receive, transport, treat, and dispose of the sewage from the Sewer System of the Special Connector. The Special Connector shall retain full power and authority to provide sewer service to the inhabitants of the Special Connector including the Acquisition, Improvement, operation, and mainte- nance of facilities for the collection of sewage arising within the cor- porate limits or boundaries of the Special Connector. The Special Connec- tor may only provide sewer service outside its corporate limits or bounda- ries to the extent it has the prior approval of the district. Prior to annexation or enlarging of its boundaries by the Special Connector, the Special Connector shall obtain the approval of the District for such an- nexation or enlargement. The District, through its Board, may disapprove such annexation or enlargement if it determines that the Special Connector cannot feasibly be served through the District's facilities. Section 304. Ca.peting Sys~. So long as any bonds or other securities of the District are outstanding, the District shall not grant any franchise o~ license to a competing system, nor shall it permit during said period (except as it may legally be required so to dol the Acquisi- tion or Improvea~ent by the Special Connector of sewage treatment or dis- posal facilities which shall increase the capacity thereof; provided, how- ever, that the District may consent to such Acquisition or Improvement and may approve the plans and specifications therefor if the Board dete~ines each of the following: A. Not Economically Feasible. It is not economically feasible for the District to furnish the desired treatment or disposal. B. Security Not Substantially Impaired. The Acquisition or Improvement of such fac11 i tf es or system by the Speci a 1 Connector or by any other Person within its boundaries shall not substanitally impair the security for the payment of the obligations of the District.· c. Approval Granted by Act. It is not inequitable or unreason- able for the District to grant such consent and approval, pursuant to Sec- t i ons 32-4 -5 06, 32-4-513, 32-4-514, 32-4-516, and 32-4-538 of the Act • Any such consent however, is subject to the provisions of Section 305 and Se c tion 307 hereof. -13 - • I • • • • • • • Section 305. Construction of Other Sewage Disposal Syst~s Prohibited. 'The District shall shall be the exlusive agency for the Ac- quisition and operation of a sewage disposal system for the area served by the District, except as otherwise provided or authorized in this Agreement and in the Act; and no sewage disposal system or other facilities for the collection, treatment, or disposal of sewage arising within the area served by the District (including any sewage treatment or disposal facili- ties of a Special Connector) shall be Acquired or Improved hereafter which shall increase the capacity thereof unless the District shall gi ve its consent thereto and shall approve the plans and specifications therefor, except for any Acquisition or Improvement of any sewer collection facili- ties or Sewer System (but not sewage treatment or disposal facilities or sewage disposal system), or any part thereof, owned by the Special Connec- tor at any point above the connection of such collection facilities or Sewer System with the Sewage Disposal System, or any part thereof, of the District, except as herein otherwise provided, including without limita- tion the provisions of Section 406 hereof. The District is empowered by the Act to give such consent and approval, subject, however, to the terms and provisions of any agreement with any holder of securities, including but not limited to the provisions in Section 304 hereof. Section 306. Limitations Upon Consent. Whenever under the terms of this Agreement the District is authorized to give its written consent, the District in its discretion may give or may refuse such writ- ten consent and if given, may restrict, limit, or condition such consent in such manner as it sha 11 deem ad vi sable. Acceptance by the District into the Sewage Disposal System from the Special Connector of sewage in a vol1111e or with characteristics exceeding or violating any limit or re- striction provided for by or pursuant to this Agreement in one or more in- stances or under one or more circumstances shall not constitute a waiver of such limit or restriction or of any of the provisions of this Agreement and shall not in any way obligate the District thereafter to accept or to make provision for sewo~ye delivered and discharged into the System in a vo lum e or with characteristics exceeding or violating any such limit or restriction in any other instance or under any other circumstances. Section 307. Fon. of Consent. Whenever under the terms of this Agr~nt a Special Connector is authorized to give its written consent, such consent IHY be given and shall be conclusively evidenced by a copy, certified by its Clerk and under its seal, of ·a resolution purporting to have been adopted by its governing body and purporting to give such con- sent. Whenever under the terms of this Agreement the District is author- ized to give its written consent, such consent may be given and shall be conclusively evidenced by a copy, certified by its Secretary and under its sea 1, of a resolution purport 1 ng to have been adopted by the Board and purporting to give such consent. -14- • I • • • • • • • - ARTICLE IV DELETERIOUS WASTES Section 401. Additional Definitions. As used in this Agree- ment, the follow i ng terms shall mean: A. "Bi ochemi cal Oxygen Demand ( • BOD • ) " means the 1 aboratory determination of the quantity of oxygen utilized in the biochemical oxidation of organic matter in a given time and at a specified tem- perature, being expressed in parts per million (ppm) or (mg/liter) of oxygen used in a period of five (5) days at 20°C. B. "Categorical Standards" means Standards as set forth and defined in 40 CFR 403.6. C. "Extra-Jurisdictional Industrial User" means any Industrial User connected to the system of connectors of Municipalities as authorized in Section 303 of the Service Contract. D. "Federal Pretreatment Regulations." All references in this Article to 40 CFR §403 refer to that section included in Title 4.0 Code of Federal Regulations Part 403, Environmental Protection Agency Genera 1 Pretreatment Regulations as authorized by the Federa 1 Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972 as amended by the Clean Water Act of 1977 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et ~). or said regulations and statutes as may from time to time be-am~d. E. "Industrial User" means any non-domestic source discharging pollutants into a publicly owned treatment works. F. "Industrial Waste Control" means the regulation by the Dis- trict of non-domestic wastewater discharges by Industrial Users and Municipalities. G. "Interference" means the i nhi bit ion or disruption of the District's System, its treatment processes or operations or its sludge processes, use or disposal, including those inhibitions or disruptions which cause or contribute to either a violation of any requirements of the District's NPDES Permit, or to the prevention of sewage sludge use or disposal by the District in accordance with any applicable statutory provisions, regulations, guidelines, or permits. H. "pH " means the logarithm of the reciprocal of the hydrogen ion concentrat i on, indicating the i ntens i ty scale of acidity and alkalinity expressed in terms of a pH scale running from 0.0 to 14.0 with a pH value of 7.0, the midpoint of the scale, representing exact neutrality and with values above 7.0 indicating alkalinity and those below 7.0, acidity. I. "Pretreatment" means the reduction of the amount of pollu- tants, the elimination of pollutants, or the alteration of the nat u re -15- • I • • • • .. • • • • of pollutant proper ties in wastewater prior to or in 1 ieu of dis - charging or ot herwise i ntroducing such pollutants into a publicly ow ned treatme nt work s, as controlled by Federal Pretreatment Regula - t ion s. J . "P rogra m" mea ns a program for the control of wastewater d i s- c harge s from Indu stria l Use rs that meets the criteria esta b lish ed under the Federal Pretrea t me nt Regulations and Artic l e IV o the Serv i ce Contract . K. "Po llutant" me ans any dredged spoil, soli d waste, incinera - tor r es idue, sewage, garbage, sewage sludge, muni t ions , chemi ca l wastes, bio l og i cal mater ials , radioactive materials, heat, wrecked or discharged equipment, rock, sand, cellar dirt and industr i al, muni ci- pal, and agr i cultural waste discharged in to water. L. "R equ irement " means any substantive or procedura 1 require- ment impCJsed on a Municipality, Spec i al Connector, or Industrial User . M. "Standard " means any pollutant discharge limitation or pro- hibition, or any regulation conta ini ng such limitations or prohi bl - tions. N. "Suspended Sol ids ( 'SS' )" means the laboratory determination of dry we i ght expressed in parts per million {ppm) or (mg/liter) of solids that either float on the surface or are in suspens i on in sewage an d can be removed from sewage by filtration • 0. "Tests for Quality" means the measurements, tests, a nd ana ly ses of the characteri sties of waters and wastes in acc ordance with the method s contained i n the latest editlon (at the time of a ny such meas ure ment, test, or analysis) of "Stand ard Methods fo r the Examination of Water and Wastewater," a jo1nt publicat ion of tne American Public Hea l th Association, the American Water Works Assoc i a- tion and the Water Pollution Control Federation, or in accorda nce with any other method prescribed by the District by rules and regul a- tions promulgated pursuant to this article. P. "User" means ar.y person who contributes, causes, or permi ts the contr i bution of wastewater to a publicly owned treatment works. Section 402. Compliance with Requiren~ents. Each Special Con- nector will cause a ll sewage at any time discharged directly or indirectly into the System by it or on its behalf to comply with any requirements of the District as permitted by law . In all cases where the application or t he enforcement of said requirements and any amendme nts t hereof t nv ol ve technical or scientific ana l yses or determinations, the District sha ll have final author i ty as to methods, standards, cr i teria, significance, evaluation, and interpretation of such analyses and determ in ations. Each Special Connector will permit no new connections and will discontinue existing public connections and wil l require the discontinuance of exist- ing private connections to its Sewer System which allow entrance theretn of such sewage as wi 11 cause the discharge at any t im e in to the System -16- • I • • • ( • • • - from such Sewer System of sewage that does not comply with said req uire - ments of the District. The District may from time to time make a deter- mi nati on of the respects in which sewage discharged into the System by any Sp ecial Connector is not in compliance with said requirements and wit h the amendments thereof, if any, then in effect. A copy of said determination shall be mailed to the Special Connector at its usual place of bus i ness and for a ll purposes of this Agreement shall be conc lu sively deemed to hav e been made in accordance with th i s artic l e and to be correct at the exp irat i on of t hi rty (30) days after such mailing unless within sa id per iod of t hirty (30) days the Spec i a l Connector sha ll have filed wit h the Di str i ct an objection thereto stating that such determin ation i s incorrect and stat ing the changes therein which should be made in order to correct s uc h determination. Section 403. Place of COIIIPl iance. Sewage discharged into the System by or on behalf of a Speci a 1 Connector sha 11 at the point of con- nection of its Sewer System with the Sewage Di spas a I System comply with the requirements hereinabove designated. Section 404. Modification of Deleterious Wastes Requirements. The District may from time to time make any amendments of said require- ments concerning deleterious wastes which may be reasonably necessary to prohibit or to regulate properly the delivery or the discharge into the System of any substances which alone or in combination with other suo- stances delivered and discharged into the System from the same source are or may be or may reasonably be expected to be substantially injurious or deleterious to the System or to its efficient operation. Every such amendment shall take effect as to the Special Connector sixty (60) days after a copy of such amendment shall have been mailed to such Specia l Connector at its usual place of business; and for all purposes of this Agreement such amend ment shall be conclusively deemed to have been ma de in accordance with this article and to be authorized fully thereby at the expiration of said period of sixty (60) days unless within said per i od of s ixty (60) days the Special Connector shall have filed with the District an objection thereto stating that such amendment waul d contravene this Agreement in a man ner prejudicial to the Special Connector and stating the manner i n wh i ch such amendment would so contravene this Agreement. Any controversy or clai m involving a Special Connector which shall have so filed an ob j ect i on to any such amendment and arising out of or relating to the making of such amendment or the breach of any requirement provided by such amendment sha 11 be referred to the Co 1 or ado Department of He a 1 th whose decision in the matter shall be binding on all parties. Section 405. Determination of Quantity, Quality, and Character- istics of Sewage. The District may use meters for determ ining the quanti- ty and will make tests and will use other means for determin ing the qual- ity and othe r characteristics of all sewage which sha 11 be del i vered and discharged into the System by a Special Connector and in accordance with sound engineer i ng practice shall determine such quantity, quality, and any other characteristics. A copy of each such determination made by the District wit h respect to each Fiscal Year shall be mailed to the Specia l Connector at its usual place of business and for all purposes of this Agreement sha 11 be conclusivel y deemed to have been made in accordance with this section and to be correct at the expiration of sixty (60) days -17- I • • • , ( • • • • ilfter such mai 1 ing unless within said period of sixty (60) days the Sp e- cia l Connector shall hav e filed with the District an objection thereto stating that such deterrni nation is incorrect and stating t he changes therein which shou ld be made in order to correct such determinat i on. From a nd after the placing of the System in operation, the Oistrict will mak e and ~1i 11 keep permanent records of the quantity, qual i ty, and other char- acter i stics of sewage delivered and discharged into the system by the Special Connector . For the purpose of determining the qu ant ity, qua li ty, a nd other characteristics o f any sewage which sha ll be or may be del ivered and discharged in to th e System by a Municipality, the District sha ll have t he right at a 11 reasonab 1 e ti mes to enter upon and to inspect the Sewer System of the Sp ec i al Connector or any industrial or co llln erc i al installa- tions connected thereto or any other connections which contribute sewage or wastes to the local Sewer System and to take normal samples under ord i - nary operati ng c onditions and to make tests, measurements, and analyses of sewage or other wastes in, entering, or to be discharged into such Sewer System . The Di strict wi 11 make and will keep a record of tests, measure- ments , and ana lyses of such sewage or other wastes entering such Sewer Syst ems, and there shall be forwarded to the Special Connector the results of such tests, measurements, and analyses appertaining thereto. Section 406. Stann Waters. Subject to the provisions of Sec- tion 301 hereof, the Speci a 1 Connector sha 11 not make or permit any con- nection to or extension of its Sewer System which is so des i gned as to permit e ntrance directly or in directly into the Sewage Di sposal System of storm water drainage from grou nd surface, roof leaders, catch basins, or any other source. Section 407. Prohibited Sewage and Wastes. A. General Discharge Prohi b ition s. None of the f ol l ow ing de - sc ri bed sewage, water, substances, mater ial s or wastes s hal l be d i scharged into the District's System; and also each governing body of each Spe cial Connector sha 11 prohibit and sha 11 prevent such discharges by any User, either directly or indirectly, into its Sewer System: 1. Any liquids , solids or ga ses which by reason of their nature or quantity are, or may be, sufficient ~ither alone or by interaction with other substances to cause fire or explosion or be injurious in any other way to the District's System, the Sewer System of a Special Connector or any of its connectors, or to the operat ion of the Dis - trict. At no time shall two successive readings on an explosion hazard meter, at the point of discharge into the District's System or the Sewer System of the Special Connector or any of its connectors (or at any point in the Systems), be more than five percent (5~) nor any single reading over ten percent (10%) of the Lower Explosive Limit (LEL) of the meter. Prohibited materials include, but are not limited to, gasoline, kerosene, naphtha, benzene, toluene, xylene, ethers, alcohols, ketones, aldehydes, peroxides, chlorates , perchlor- ates, bromates, carbides, hydrides, and sulfides. 2. Any solid or viscous material which could cause an obstruc- tion to flow in the sewers or in any way could interfere with the treatment process, including as examples of such materials but with- out limiting the generalit~ of the foregoing , significant proportions -18- • I • • , • • • • of ashes, wax, paraffin, cinders, sand, mud, straw, shavings, metal, glass, rags, lint, feathers, tars, plastics, wood and sawdust, paunch manure, hair and fleshings, entrails, lime slurries, beer and distil- lery slops, grain processing wastes, grinding compounds, acetylene generation sludge, chemical residues, acid residues, food processing bulk solids, snow, ice, and all other solid objects, material, re- fuse, and debris no t normally contained in sanitary sewage. 3. Any wastewater having a pH less than 5.0 for discharges into the Sewer System of the Special Connector or that of any of its con- nectors, or less than 6.0 or greater than 9.0 for discharges into the District's System, or wastewater having any other corrosive property capable of causing damage or hazard to any part of the District's system or the Sewage System of the Special Connector or any of its connectors, or to personnel. 4. Any wastewater having a temperature which will inhibit biological activity at the District's treatment plant, but in no case wastewater containing heat in such amounts that the temperature at the introduction into the District's treatment plant exceeds 40°C {104°F), 5. Any pollutants, including oxygen demanding pollutants (BOD, etc.) released at a flow rate and/or pollutant concentration which wi 11 cause interference with the operations or processes of the District. In no case shall a slug load have a flow rate or contain concentrations or qualities of pollutants that exceed for any time period longer than fifteen (15) minutes more than five (5) times the average twenty-four (24) hour concentration, quantities, or flow during normal operation. 6. Any water or wastes containing a toxic substance in suffici- ent quantity, either singly or by interaction with other substances, to injure or interfere with any sewage treatment process, to consti- tute a hazard to humans or to animals, or to create any hazard in the waters which receive the treated or untreated sewage. B. Specific Discharge Limitations. The District shall estab- lish in its Rules and Regulations, and may from time to time amend, speci- fic limitations governing the discharge of pollutants into the System, and into the Sewer System of the Special connector. By this reference, such limitations are herein incorporated, Section 408. General Requir.-ents Regarding Deleterious Wlstes. None of the following described sewage, water, substances, materia 1 s or wastes shall be discharged into the District's System; and also the gov- erning body of the Special Connector shall prohibit and shall prevent any discharges from any outlet into its Sewer System, if such discharges cause or significantly contribute to a violation of any of the requirements con- tained herein: A. Sewage of such a nature and delivered at such a rate as to impair the hydraulic capacity of the System, normal and reasonable wear and usage excepted; -19- • I • • , , • • • - B. Sewage of such quantity, quality, or other nature as to i mpa i r the strength or the durability of the sewer structures, equi pm ent or t reatmen t wor ks, eit her by chemical or by mechan i cal action; C. Sewage having a flash point lower than 187°F, as determined by t he Tag l iabue (Tag.) close cup method; D. Any radioactive substance, unl ess the District shall have g ive n wri t ten consent to its discharge; E. Any garbage other than that received directly into the Sewer System of the Special Connector from domestic and C0111nercial garbage grinders in dwellings, restaurants, hotels, stores, and institutions, by which such garbage has been shredded to such a degree that all particles wil l be carried freely under flow conditions normally prevailing in public sewers with no particl e greater than one-half (1/2) inch in any dimension; F. Any night soil or septic tank pumpage, except by permit in writ i ng from the District at such points and under such conditions as the Di strict may stipulate in each permit; G. Sludge or other material from sewage or industrial waste treatment plants or from water treatment plants, except such sludge, t~e disc harge of which to the System shall be governed by the provisions of th i s Agreement herein set forth or as otherwise authorized by the Dis- trict; H. Water which has been used for cooling or heat transfer pur- poses without recirculation, discharged from any system of condensation, air conditioning, refrigeration, or similar use; I. Water accumulated in excavations or accumulated as the re- sult of grading, water taken from the ground by well points, or any other drainage associated with construction; J. Any water or wastes containing grease or o1l or other sub- stances that will solidify or become discernably viscous at temperatures between 32°F and 150°; K. Any wastes that conta.in a corrosive, noxious, or malodorous material or substance which, either singly or by reaction with other wastes, i s capable of causing damage to the System or to any part thereof, of creating a publ i c nu i sance or haza~d. or of preventing entry i nto t he sewers for maintenance and repair; L. Any wastes that contain concentrated dye wastes or ot her wastes that are either highly colored or could become highly colorea by reacting with any other wastes, except by permission of the District; M. Any wastes which arc unusual i n co mpos i t i on, i .e., c ont ain an extremely large amount of suspended sol ids or ROD; are high in di s - solved sol i ds such as sodium ch l or i de, calc i um c hlo ri de, or s o l ium sul- fate; conta i n substances conduc i ve to creat i ng tastes or odors in dr i nki ng water supplies; otherwise make such waters unpalatable even after c onv e n- t i onal water purification treatment; or are in any other way extremely -20 - • I • • , • • • • unusual unless the District determines that such wastes may be admitted to the System or shal l be modified or treated before being so admitted; N. Any substance which may cause the District's effl uent or any other product of the District such as residues, sludges or scums, to be unsuitable for reclamation and reuse or to interfere with the reclamation process. In no case shall a substance discharged to the System cause the District to be in non-compl i ance with sludge use or disposal criter i a, guidelines or regulations developed under Section 405 of the Federal Water Pollution Contro l Act; any criteria, guidelines, or regulations affecting sludge use or disposal deve l oped pursuant to the Solids Waste Disposal Act, the Clean Air Act, the Toxic Substances Control Act, or State crite- ria applicable to the sludge management method being used; 0. Any substance which may cause the District to violate its National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit or the receiving water quality standards. Section 409. Pretreatment/Industrial Waste Control Program_ A. Program Requirements: 1. All Municipalities and Special Connectors are required to design and administer Pretreatment/lndustri a l Waste Control Progra1ils which are in accordance with this Article IV, and which will enable the District to comply with all Pretreatment and effluent limitation conditions of its National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit and applicable sludge disposal regulations. 2. The Special Connector will enact and enforce an ordinance or resolution which conforms to 40 CFR §403.8(f)(l) Pretreatment Program Requirements, as from time to time amended, for legal authority and containing al l other legal provisions mandated by this Agreement. The Special Connector shall formulate, fund, and implement procedures which will enable compliance with the "Procedures" and "Funding" requirements contained in 40 CFR §403.8(f)(2) and (3) of the Federal Pretreatment Regulations. 3. The Special Connector shall adopt and enforce in its ordi- nance or resolution provisions which are i n conformance to the fol- lowing provisions: · (a) A provision requiring any Industrial User responsible for a s ignificant accidental or unusual discharge to notify immediately both the Special Connector and the District. (b) A provision precluding, except where authorized by Categorical Standards, the use of dilution to attain conformance to Pretreatment/Industrial Waste Control Standards, and author- izing the Spec ial Connector to set mas s limitations for any Industrial User us ing improper dilution. (c) A prov ision forbidding and, where possible, penalizing the knowing transmittal of false informat ion by an Industrial User to the Special Connector or District. -21- • ., I • • • • • • • • (d) A prov1s1on requiring the installation of all necessary monitoring and Pretreatment facilities by Industrial Users. (e) For a City Special Connector, a provision applying civ- il or cri min al penalties against Industrial Users which violate Pretreatment/Industrial Waste Control Standards and Require- ments. For a Special District Special Connector, a prov1sion for contractual terms providi ng for 1 iquidated damages to be assessed against Industrial Users which violate Pretreatment/In- dustrial Waste Control Standards and Requirements. Where possi- ble, such penalties and liquidated damages shall be set at a level determined by the District to provide a reasonable degree of deterrence to violations. (f) A provision adopting discharge limitations for Users at least as stringent as the corresponding limitations in Section 407 of this Agreement and Section 7 of the Rules and Regula- tions. (g) A provision requiring that Industrial Users agree to act and allow the District to act as provided under the provi-'.:: sions of this Article IV. (h) A provision requiring that any User discharging ariy toxic pollutants which cause an increase in the cost of managing the effluent or the s 1 udge of the District's treatment works shall pay for such increased costs • 4. The District shall consult and cooperate with the Special Connector in determining the need for enacting any supplemental amendments to the ordinance or resolution which are necessary to ensure the effective administration of the Pretreatment/Industr ial Waste Control Program. The District may provide guidance to the Spe- cial Connector on all pertinent matters, including, but not 1 imited to, Spec i a 1 Connector user fee systems, Special Connector permit systems and Special Connector administrative proceedings and hearings to determine the nature and extent of Industrial User violations. B. Dilution Prohibited. Except where permitted by Categorical Standards, no Industrial User may use dilution of a discharge as a partial or comp 1 ete substitute for adequate treatment to attain compliance with Pretreatment/Industrial Waste Control Standards. The District may set or require a Special Connector to set mass limitations for those Industrial Users which are using improper dilution to meet a Pretreatment/Industrial Waste Control Standard. c. Accidental or Unusual Discharge. An Industrial User shall inwnediately notify the District and the Special Connector in which it is located of any industrial waste discharge which may disrupt System treat- ment processes or operations, damage System facilities, cause a NPDES Per- mit violation at the District's treatment plant or degrade sludge quality excessively, or which differs significantly in quantity or quality from discharges under normal operations, -22- • 'I I • - ( ' • • • • • • D. Ca tegor i ca 1 Standards. 1. Once promulgated, Categorical Standards for a part icul ar i ndust ria 1 subcategory, if more stringent, sha 11 supersede a 11 con- flicting discharge limitations contained in or issued pursuant to the Article IV, as they apply to that industrial subcategory. The Di s- .trict shall notify all affected Special Connectors of pertinent 40 CFR §403.12 reporting requirements. 2. The District shall make the final determination, subject only to 4D CFR §403.6 federal or state review, as to whether a par- ticular Industrial User is subject to a particular Categorical Stand- ard. The District may require that the Special Connector collect and forward to the District all information necessary to make this deter-mination. E. Significant Industrial Users. l. The Special Connector shall control, through permit, con- tract or similar means, industrial waste discharges within its serv- ice area. 2. A Significant Industrial User is defined as any Industrial User which discharges wastewater ( i) at a rate of f1 ow greater than 25,000 gallons per average work day, (ii) containing toxic pollutants as defined pursuant to Section 307 of the Clean Water Act, 33 u.s.c. 1251 et seq ., (iii) determined by the District, the Colorado Depart- ment of Health or the u.s. Environmental Protection Agency to have a significant impact, either singly or in conjunction with other indus- trial wastewater, on the Sewage Disposal System, sludge quality, System effluent quality or air quality. 3. The District shall make the final determination as to whether a particular Industrial User is a Significant Industrial User. To this end, the District may require that a Special Connector collect and forward to the District all information necessary to make this determination. F. Requirements for Information Transmittal. The Special Con- nector shall file with the District a certified copy of (i) its industrial waste discharge ordinance or resolution, and any amendments thereto, and (ii) each industrial waste permit or contract issued pursuant to the ord i - nance or resolut ion . Also, the Special Connector shall deliver to the Di strict in a timely fashion copies of· all industrial monitoring reports, including 40 CFR 403.12 compl i ance reports. Th i s records requirement shall apply both to self-monitoring conducted by industrial waste dis- chargers in accordance with federal, state, District, or local require- ments, and to compliance monitoring by each Special Connector. G. Program Delegation and Gu i dance. 1. Program Delegation. The Special Connector may enter into an agreement with the District providing the District with the legal authority to carry out technical and administrative procedures neces- sary to implement the Pretreatment/Industrial Waste Control Program -23- • I • • • • • • • • at the local leve l. These procedures may include, among others, updating the indu strial waste survey, providing technical services, such as process chemic al analysis and engineering advice, relating to ~ the is suance and review of industrial waste discharge permits, in- specting and monitoring industrial waste discharges, waste discharge fc!lcilities and operations of permittees, and provi'ding technical assistance for l ocal enforcement actions. Where Program delegation occurs , the District shall bill the Special Connector for the costs incurr ed by the Di str i ct in conjunction with the ao m1nistration of the Program on behalf of the Special Connector. 2. Program Guidance. The District shall issue Rules and Regu- 1 at ions and guidelines to assist and to evaluate the performance of the Spec i al Connector which chooses to administer, wholly or partly, the Pretreatment/ Industrial Waste Control Program on behalf of the Distri ct. Th ese Rules and Regulations and guidelines shall be bind- ing on the Special Connector and admissible as evidence in any admin- istrative or legal proceeding intended to determine whether the Special Connector has executed its Program Responsibilities in sub- stantial conformance to Federal Pretreatment Regulations and the requirements of this Agreement. H. Program Review. The District shall review Special Connector ord in ances and amendments thereof for conformance to 40 CFR §403.8(f)(l) Pretreatment Re quirements for minimum legal authorities and for the in- clusion of all other legal provisions mandated by this Agreement. The District shall periodically review the enforcement efforts of Special Connectors to ascertain whether Pretreatment/Industrial Waste Control Re- quirements and Standards are being diligently enforcea at the local level. Insofar as the Spec i a 1 Connector administers the Pretreatment/ Industrial Waste Control Program, the District shall periodically review the Special Connector's procedures, including, but not limited to, proce- dures for updating the industrial waste survey, and for inspecting, sam- pling, and monitoring industrial waste discharges, to ensure that each such Special Connector is administering the Program in technical conform- ance to "Procedures" and "Funding" requirements under 40 CFR 403.8(f) (2) and (3) of the Federal Pretreatment Regulations and to the provisions of this Agreement. /lJiy significant Program changes shall be subject to District approval. I. Remedies. 1. Emergency Remedies. Where a discharge to the System reason- ably appears to present an imminent endangerment to the he a 1 th or welfare of persons, or presents or may present an endangerment to the environment, or threatens to interfere with the operat i on of the District, the District shall immediately initiate investigative pro- cedures to identify the source of the discharge, and take any steps necessary to halt or prevent the discharge. If necessa ry, the District shall seek injunctive relief against the violating Special Connector and any Industrial User contributing significant ly to the emergency condition • -24- • I • • • • • • - 2. Routine Remedies. If the District determines that a Pre- treatment/Industrial Waste Control Program as administered by the Special Connector is not in compliance with Pretreatment/lndustria l rJ aste Control Requirements, or that the discharge from a Special Con- nector is not in compliance with District Standards, the District shall issue a notice setting forth the Requirements and Standards not being complied with and directing the Special Connector to attain conformance to these Requirement s and Standards within a period o f ten (lD) days. If after ten (1D) days, the Special Connector has failed or re- fuses to comply with this notice , the District may issue an addi- tional notice setting forth remedial actions to be taken by the vio- lating Special Connector and a time schedule for attaining compliance with a 11 Pret reatment/lndustri a 1 Waste Control Requirements and Sta ndards . If after th i rty (3D) days notice, the v i olat ing Special Connector has not taken necessary steps to correct the violation , the District may assume in whole or in part Pretreatment/Industrial Waste Control Program responsibilities in 1 ieu of the violating Special Conn ector, The District may continue in this capacity until the vio- lating Special Connector agrees to the original terms of the notice and any add iti ona l terms which the District feels are necessary to ensure ongoing compliance by the Spec i al Connector with all Pretreat- ment/Industr i al Waste Control Requirements and Standards, · J. Pr ogram Preemption. Where the District preempts the Spec ial connector in the execution of Pretreatment/Industrial Waste Control Pro- gram responsib ilities, the District shall directly enforce Federal Pre- treatment Standards, including Categorical Standards, and the provisions of Article IV of th is Service Contract against the Industrial Users located within the service area of the Special Connector. The District may re quest that all industrial self-monitoring reports, includi ng those required under 40 CFR §4D3.12, be conveyed directly to the Di str ict . Moreover, the District shall carry out all inspection and sampling activi- ties necessary to monitor compliance with Pretreatment/Industrial Waste Control Standards and Requirements. Where Program preemption occurs, the District shall have the right to seek injunctive relief against the Spe- cial Connector and any Industrial User in order to obtain full compliance with Pretreatment/lndustrial Waste Control Standards and Requirements. The District shall bill the Special Connector for costs incurred by the District in conjunction with the administration of the Program in lieu of the Special Connector. The District sha 11 have the · right to require the cessation of any industrial wastewater discharge in violation of Pretreatment/Industri- al Waste Control Standards and Requirements. Where the District finds an Industrial User to be in violation of any Pretreatment/Industrial Waste Control Standard or Requirement, the District may require the Industrial user to enter into a bilateral contract with the District containing any conditions, including conditions relating to the installment of pretreat- ment or monitoring facilities, necessary to ensure compliance with Pre- treatment/Industrial Waste Control Standards and Requirements. At the d1scretion of the District, these conditions may be incorporated into the Special Connector industrial waste discharge permit or contract once Program responsibilities are returned to the Special Connector • -25- • I • • - • ( • • • • K. Extra-Jurisdictional Industria l Users. The Spec ial Connec - tor shall have the responsibility for those Industrial Users located out- side its corporate 1 imits, who discharge industrial wastewater into the Sewer System of the Special Connector. Each extra-jurisdictional Indus- trial User shall be subject to an ordinance, resolution or equivalent source of legal authority which contains 40 CFR §403.8(f)(l) minimum legal authorities and all other legal provisions mandated by this Service Con- tr act. Each extra-jurisdictional Industrial User shall also be included in a Pretreatment Program which substantially conforms to 40 CFR §403.8- ( f) (2) and (3) "P rogram" and "Funding" requirements. To this end, the Spec i a 1 Connector shall make contractual arrangements with the extra- ju risdictional legal entity exercising powers over the Industrial User providing either for the inclusion of the Industrial User in the Dis- trict's Pretreatment/Industrial Waste Control Program, or for formal review of a Pretreatment Program administered by the extra-jurisdicitonal le gal entity. Where necessary to obtain compliance with Federal Pretreat- ment Regulations, the Special Connector shall enter into a separate contract with each extra-jurisdictional Industrial User discharging into it s Sewer System. The Special Connector shall also secure by contract, as it ap- plies to extra-jurisdictional Industrial Users, for each of the following District rights: (i) the right to inspect, sample, and monitor Industrial Users, (ii) the right to terminate service to an Industrial User on 'an emergency basis, (iii) the right to determine the applicability of Cate- gorical Standards and to determine Significant Industrial Users, (iv) the right to receive copies of all monitoring reports, (v) the right to ex- plore all Article IV discharge limitations, and (vi) the right to act in lieu of the Special Connector in executing Pretreatment/Industrial Waste Control Program responsibilities. Where the Special Connector and extra-jurisdictional legal ent i - ty fail to execute their Program responsibilities in obtaining comp liance by extra-jur i sdictional Industrial Users with all applicable Pretreatment- /Industrial Waste Control Standards and Requirements, the District shall have full recourse to the remedy provisions of this Service Contract as they apply to the Special Connector receiving the industrial waste d is - charge in question. L. Exemptions. The Special Connector administering a Pretreat- ment Program, separate from that of the District, which has been approved by the Regional Administrator of EPA or the Director of the Water Quality Control Division of the Colorado Department of Health in accordance with 40 CFR §403.11 of the Feder a 1 Pretreatment Regu 1 at ions, may be exempted from compliance with certain provisions of this Section 411, as determined by the District • -Z6- • I • • ' • • • • ARTICLE V DISTRICT BUDGET, ANNUAL CHARGES, SERVICE CHARGES AND THEIR ESTABLISHMENT AND COLLECTION Section 501. Annual Budget. A. Preparation of Preliminary Budget. The District shall pre- pare annually a preliminary budget, including therein, but not limited to, Operation and Maintenance Expenses, Debt Service, provision for required and reasonable reserves, and any provision for capital expenditures for the ensuing Fiscal Year. Every preliminary budget and every Annual Budget shall also set forth a statement of the sources of funds to be available to defray such expenditures, including without limitation the Annual Charge to be paid by each Municipality and Special Connector. B. Hearing on Preliminary Budget. The District shall hold a public hearing not less than seven (7) months before the beginning of any Fiscal Year, at which any holder of any security issued by the District or any Municipality may appear in person or by agent or attorney and may present any objections he may have to the final adoption of the budget (or such Fiscal Year. Notice of the time and place of such hearing shall be published at l east once in a newspaper at least ten (10) days before such hearing, and the District shall at least ten (10) days before such hearing cause a copy of such notice and a copy of the preliminary budget to be mailed to the Special Connector. C. Adoption of Annual Budget. On or before the first day of August next preceding each Fiscal Year, the District shall finally adopt the Annual Bu dget for such next succeed in g Fiscal Year. D. Quasi -Annua 1 Budget. If for any reason the District sha 11 not have adopted the Annua 1 Budget on or before the first day of August next preceding any Fiscal Year, the preliminary budget for such year or otherwise the budget for the preceding Fi sea 1 Year shall be deemed to be in effect for such Fiscal Year until the Annual Budget for such Fi scal Year is adopted. E. AJllendment of Annua 1 Budget. The District may at any time adopt an amended Annual Budget for the _then current Fiscal Year. Section 502. Li~itations on Operation and Maintenance Ex- penses. The District shall not incur Operation and Maintenance Expenses in any year in excess of the reasonable and necessary amount thereof. The District shall not expend any amount and sha 11 not incur any indebtedness for maintenance, repair, and operation in excess of the aggregate amount provided for Operation and Ma i ntcnance Expenses in the Annua 1 Budget (if any) then in effect, subject to the provisions of paragraph E of Section 501 hereof. Nothing in this Section 502 hereof contained shall limit the amount which the District may expend for Operation and Maintenance Ex- penses in any Fiscal Year, provided any amounts expended therefor in ex- cess of the Annual Budget (if iny) shall be received by the District from -27- • .~· . I • • • • • • some source other than the income of the System; and the Di str ict sha 11 not make or receive any re im bursement therefor out of such income, except to the extent the Board may determine to use any moneys in any reserve fund or s i nking fund available therefor. Section 503. Levy, Collection, and Calculation of Annual Charges. With respect to all sewage delivered into the System and for all direct or indirect connection with and all use and services of the System, except for any Service Charges appertaining only to any Interceptors, the District shall make, impose and call ect Annua 1 Charges in accordance with this Agreement, as the same may be amended or otherwise supplemented from time to time by contract. Service Charges appertaining to the Intercep- tors may be fixed and collected by the District whenever the Board so determines; provided, however, that no Service Charges shall be fixed after the Board has fixed any Annual Charges hereunder. Classification for charges shall be reasonable. The charges shall be uniform within classification and shall be based upon the amount and quality of sewage delivered into the System and for all direct and indirect connection with and all use and services of the System, except for minimum charges, charges for the availability of service or readiness to serve by the System, reasonable penalties for delinquencies, including interest thereon from any date due at a rate of one and one-half per centum (1 1/21) per month (or fraction thereof), reasonable attorneys' fees, and other costs of collection. In conformity with the Service Contract and with the Act, the District may revise the method for the allocation of the Annual Charges or the method of the determination of rates, as provided in Sched- ule B hereof. Said rates shall at all times be calculated and prescribed and from time to time revised, and such Annua l Charges shall be computed, made, imposed, and collected so that the income of the System collected, except for any Cost of the Project capitalized with the proceeds of bonds or other securities of the District, except for any Service Charges apper- taining only to Interceptors, and except for any other moneys availab le therefor ( i ncl udi ng any proceeds to the District of use and occupancy insurance), will be at least sufficient: A. To pay at all times all Operation and Maintenance Expenses and at the end of each Fiscal Year to maintain therefor reserve require- ments; B. To provide in each Fiscal Year a sum equal to the Debt Serv- ice for the Bond Year conmenc i ng in such F1 sea 1 Year computed as of the beginning of such Bond Year; c. To provide at all times for any deficits of the District resulting from failure to receive any Annual Charges or any sums payable to the District by any Special Connector or from any other cause; D. To provide at all times such sums for reserves and for sink- ing funds as may be fixed by the Service Contract or other contract of the District or as may be otherwise determined from time to time by the Uoard (subject to any existing contractual limitations); E. To provide moneys required by any contract of the District or otherwise for any capital expenditure, including without limitation -28- • ~-· I • - ' ' • • • • Acquisitions, Improvements, Ext ensions, and Alterations, or any other pur- pose authorized by the Act (not hereinabove provided) and as so determined by the Board; and F. To comply at all times in all respects with the terms and the provisions of any resolution of the Board and of the Act and to pay and to discharge a 11 other charges or 1 i ens payab 1 e out of the income of the System when due and enforceable. Section 504. Compl1ance with Service Contract and Enforcement of Annual Charges. Annual Charges shall at all times be fixed and col- lected so that the District can pay without default any obligation t hereof for which provision has not otherwise been made. The District shall not release the obligations of the Special Connector under this Agreement or other Agreements as from time to time amended or otherwise supplemented, shall take a 11 reasonab 1 e measures permitted by this Agreement or by the Act or otherwise by 1 aw, i ncl udi ng but not 1 imi ted to the enforcement measures stated in Section 610 hereof, to en force prompt payment to it of all Annual Charges. The District shall at all times (to the extent per- mitt ed by the Act or otherwise permitted by law) defend, enforce, pre- serve, and protect the rights, benefits, and privileges of the District and of any holder of any bond or other security of the District under or with respect to this Special Connectors Agreement. Section 505. Annual Charges tn Lteu of Service Charges. The Annual Charges payable by the Special Connector to the District under the provisions of this Agreement (in the absence of any modification to the contrary hereafter by contract) are and shall be in 1 ieu of Service Charges with regard to the Sewer System of such Special Connector and to real property connected to the Sewer System of the Special Connector. Section 506. Methods for Allocation of Annual Charges and Oetennfnation of Rates. The Annual Charges shall be allocated and rates shall be determined as provided in the method for the allocation of the Annua 1 Charges and the method for the determination of rates, attached hereto and mark ed "S chedule B," and by this reference made a part hereof. The unit charges applicable with respect to sewage delivered and dis- charged into the System by any Municipalities or Special Connectors shall be at all times uniform as to all Municipalities and Special Connectors for the same type, class, and amount of use or service of the System and shall give effect to quantity and quality differentials in substant ially the proportions reflected by said methods and shall not be more favorable to any Municipality or Special Connector than the unit charges app licable with respect to sewage so delivered an 'd discharged by any other Mun icipal - ity or Special Connector. Section 507. Sewer Connection Charge. In addit ion to other Annual or Service Charges, the District shall impose and collect Sewer Connection Charges in accordance with the Service Contract and Schedule C attached hereto, as the same may be amended or otherwise supplemented from time to time by the Board, for each new or altered connection to a sani- tary sewer or sewer drainage system served by the District. The Sewer Connection Charge shall be assessed to the Special Connector (including the charges for their connectors and others) on the basis of the number of -29- • I • -• • • new or altered "single family residential equivalent" connections to a Sewer System which is directly or indirectly served by the District Sys- tem. lt shall oe the responsibility of the Special Connector to a ffir m and report the number of new or altered "single family residential equiva- lent" connections to the District. The Sewer Connection Charge for each new or altered "singl e fa mily residential equivalent" shall be determined annually as provided in "S chedule c.• Subject to the 9-1-77, the 11-1-82 and the 5-1-82 Bond Resolu - tions and the proceedings authorizing the issuance of obligations of the District which may hereafter be issued, Sewer Connection Charges will be assigned to the payment of annual principal and interest (debt service) on obligations of the District, as authorized by the voters of the District in the 1981 Bond Election, and obligations hereafter issued to finance other growth-related projects as may from time to time be determined by the Roard of Directors. To the extent that receipts from Sewer Connection Charges exceed those required for such annual debt service, Sewer Connection Charges may be used, subject to such resolutions and other proceedings, to fund debt service bond reserves or to fund future capital construction projects related to growth. The number of new or altered "single family residential equiva- 1 ent • connections assessed for each new or a 1 tered i nd i vi dua 1 connection to the District System shall be determined in accordance with Schedule C. The Sewer Connection Charges and the administration thereof as provided in Schedule C shall be reviewed annually and may be changed by Resolution duly enacted by action of the Board of Directors, without addi- tional amendment to this Special Connectors Agreement. Section 508. Definition of New Connection and Altered Connec- tion. For the purposes of this Agreement and al l Rules and Regulations related thereto issued by the District, a "new connection" shall mean the physical attachment of a new sewer line to the sewer system serv ing a dwelling or but lding. An "altered connection" shall mean any building or premise that is reconstructed or upgraded, and either increases the number of single family li ving units resulting in added flows or installs a larger water service tap at the existing location. Such build ing or prem- ise shall be required to pay a Sewer Connection Charge for the additional living units or increased water service tap size. A building or premise that is demolished and rebuilt shall receive a credit for the pre-existing number of single family living units if reconstructed as a residential dwelling or a credit for the previouus water service tap size if recon- structed as a non-residential building at the same site. Section 509. Applications of Sections 507 and 508. Sections 507 and 508 of this Article shall not be construed to affect any rights to a sewer tap or permit which existed before January 1, 1982, nor to make a Special Connector liable to the District for Sewer Connection Charges for connection to the Sewer System of the Special Connector which were paid for or collected before such date. -30- • I • • • • • ARTICLE VI PAYMENT BY SPECIAL CONNECTORS Section 601. Special Connector's Duty to Pay Charges. The Special Connector will pay to the District any Service Charges and the Annual Charges due therefrom to the District and relating to the System, as herein provided and pursuant to the Act. Section 602. Certification of Estimated Charges. On or before the first day of September next preceding each Fi seal Year, the District shall make and deliver to the Special Connector subject to the payment to the District of any Service Charge or any Annual Charge fixed thereby for such Fiscal Year, the District's certificate stating the estimated amount of the Charge. Such Charges in the aggregate as so certified in any cal- endar year by the District to the Municipalities and Special Connectors shall be sufficient to pay the amounts estimated to be needed by the Dls- trict from Charges in the next following Fiscal Year as shown in the An- nual Budget therefor. Any such certificate may adjust for the Fiscal Year in which that certificate is rendered, regardless of any other adjustment theretofore or thereafter made, the estimated Charge previously so certi- fied to the Special Connector, Each such adjustment shall be based u·pon revised estimates resulting from the operation and maintenance of the System by the District for a portion of the current Fiscal Year prior to the date of any such adjusted estimate. Section 603. Preliminaries to Payment by Special Connectors. Each Special Connector, after the receipt of each such certificate, shall make all budgetary and other provisions or appropriations necessary to provide for and to authorize the payment by the Special Connector to the District of the Charge for the next following Fiscal Year as the Charge becomes due and payable, subject to any debit or credit resulting from any such adjusted estimate of any prior Charge and from any final adjustment of any such Charge, as hereinbefore and hereafter provided, Section 604. Time of Payment by Special Connector. Each Spe- cial Connector will pay to the District in each Fiscal Year the estimated Charge for that year in four (4) substantially equal quarterly install- ments, payable on or before the 15th days of March, June, September, and December in the Fiscal Year, subject to any debit or credit not thereto- fore made and resulting from any adjusted estimate or final adjustment of any Charge for any previous Fiscal Year. Section 605. Final Adjust.ent of Each Charge. The Charge fixed or imposed against the Special Connector for each Fiscal Year shall be finally adjusted in amount, regardless of whether the original estimate thereof shall have been at any time or times adjusted prior to the time hereby fixed for the final adjustment of the amount of that Charge. The final adjustment of any Charge for any Fiscal Year shall be made on or before the last day of March next following the last day of that Fiscal Year. -31- • I • • 1 \ • • • • Section 606. Hearing on and Notice of Final Adjustment. Prior to making any final adjustment of any Charge for any Fiscal Year, as pro- vided in Section 605 hereof, the District shall hold at its regular meet- ing in March next following the last day of that Fiscal Year a hearing on the proposed final ad ju stment. At the hearing any holder of any security issued by the District or any Municipality or Special Connector may appear in person or by agent or attorney and may present any objections he may have to th e final adjustment of the Charge for such Fiscal Year. Nothing herein contained shall be construed as preventing the District from making the final adjustment after the hearing but at the same meeting at which the hearing was held. The District shall at least ten (10) days before such hearing cause a copy of such notice to be mailed to the Special Con-nector. Section 607. Time of Making Adjustments to Estimated Charges. Notwithstanding any other provision herein, the District in its absolute discretion may adjust the estimated Charges for any Fiscal Year and may certify any debits and credits resulting therefrom to the respective Special Connector at any time or from time to time prior to the final adjustment therefor made as herein provided, whenever the Board determines that for any reason such adjustment is necessary or desirable. Section 608. Payments to Balance Adjustments. Any Special Connector to which is certified by the District a supplemental Charge resulting from any final or other adjustment shall make provision for its payment in the next annua 1 budget prepared by the Spec i a 1 Connector and, in the manner provided in Section 604 hereof, shall pay the supplemental Charge in quarterly installments in the Fiscal Year for which that annual budget of the Special Connector is prepared, as well as the estimated Charge payable therein, unless the Special Connector has moneys available to pay, and determines to pay, the supplemental Charge prior thereto. Similarly any Special Connector to which is certified by the District any credit resulting from any final or other adjustment shall make provision therefor in the next annual budget prepared by the Special Connector and shall thereby reduce the amount of the estimated Charge payable in the Fiscal Year from which that annual budget is prepared, unless the District has moneys available to pay, and does remit the amount of the credit to the Special Connector prior to the payment of the estimated Charge. Section 609. Lfmitatfons upon Adjustment of Charges. Whenever the District adjusts the Charges · for any Fiscal Year, including but not necessarily limited to the final adjustment, the credits to Municipalities and Special Connectors shall equal the debits to Municipalities and Special Connectors paying Charges for that Fiscal Year, except for any suppl ementa 1 Charge fixed or imposed as a reasonab 1 e penalty for any delinquency, including any interest thereon, and any reasonable attorneys' fees and any other costs of collecting any delinquency. Each such final adjustment shall be uniform within each reasonable classification and shall be based upon the actual amount and quality of sewage delivered into the System and for all actual direct or ind1rect connections with and all actual use and services of the system, except for any minimum charge, any charge for the availability of service or readiness to serve by the Sys- tem, any reasonable penalty for c1ny delinquency, including any interest thereon, any reasonable attorneys' fees and any other costs of collecting any delinquency. Each adjustment not a final adjustment similarly shall -32- • I • • • • • • be unfform within reasonable classification and shall be based upon a revised estimate of such amount of sewage, such use, and such services, subject to such exceptions. · Section 610. Enforcement. If any payment or any part thereof due to the District from the Special Connector shall remain unpaid follow- ing its due date, the Special Connector shall be charged with and 1·1ill pay to the District interest on the amount unpaid from its due date until paid at the· rate of one and one-half per centum (1 1/2 ~ l per month (or fraction thereof); and the District in its discretion may charge and collect Serv- ice Charges or Annual Charges from each Municipality or Special Connector sufficient to meet any default or deficiency in any payments herein agreed to be made by any Municipality or Special Connector. If in any such case Charges are so collected, the amount ultimately so collected by the Dis- trict from any defaulting Municipality or Special Connector 1·1ill be credi - ted against the amount of such default or deficiency or any payments then or theretofore due to the District fro111 each tlunicipality or Special Con- nector to offset such default or deficiency under the provisions of this Agreement. Every obligation assumed by or imposed upon any Special Con- nector by this Agreement shall be enforceable by the District by appropri- ate action, suit, or proceeding at law or in equity; and the District may have and may pursue any and all remedies provided by 1 aw for the enforce- ment of such obligation, including the remedies and processes provided by the Act with respect to Annual Charges or other obligations, as provided in Section 504 hereof and specifically such enforcement as provided in Section 5lO(m) of the Act. Section 611. Character of obligations. Failure on the part of the District or of any l·lunicip'llity or Special Connector in any instance or under any ci rcwnstance to observe or to perform fully any obligation assumed by or imposed upon it by this Agreement shall not make the Dis- trict liable in damages to a t~unicipal ity or Special Connector or relieve a l~unicipality or Special Connector from making any payment to the Dis- trict or from folly perfonning any other obligation required of it under this Agreement; but such llounicipal ity or Special Connector may have and may pursue any and all other remedies provided by law for compelling per- fonnance by the District or such other rrunicipillity or Special Connector of said obligation assumed by or imposed upon t~e District or such other Municipality or Special Connector. ARTICLE VII NISCELLANEOUS Section 701. Tenn of Agreement. This Agreement' shall be i n full force and effect and shall be binding upon the parties hereto from 1ts effective date for a period of forty-five (45) years from the date of the Servi c e Contract or until the first day of January next following the last outstanding bond or note issued by the District, as authorized by subsections (5) or (7), respectively; of Section 32-4-523 and of all sec- t i ons sup p lemental thereto of the Act, whichever be later. Thereafter -3 3- • I • • • • • • • • - this Agre~nent shall continue as a binding contract to the extent permit- ted by law from year to year until a District Officer files with the Sec- retary or Clerk of the party hereto a notice that thirty (30) days after the last such filing or on any date designated in the notice following the expiration of such thirty (30) days' period this Agreement shall than be terminated, Section 702, Securities of District. All bonds, notes, or other obligations of the District referred to in this Agreement or to be issued by the District shall for all purposes of this Agreement be the sole obligation of the District and shall not in any way be deemed a debt or a liability of the Special Connector, Section 703. Absence of Representations. No party hereto makes any representation concerning the use of property, building permits re- quired or not required, zoning regulations of any body corporate and poli- tic, or concerning the exemption from licenses, permits, or taxes. Section 704. Conformance with Laws. Each party hereto agrees to abide by and to conform to all applicable laws of the Federal Govern- ment, the State, and any other body corporate and politic having any jurisdiction in the premises. Nothing in this section contained, however, shall require any party hereto to comply with any law the validity or applicability of which shall be contested in good faith and, if neces"Sary or desirable, by appropriate legal proceedings. Section 705. Acts of God. No party hereto shall be responsible or liable in any way for Acts of God or any other act or acts or omissions beyond the control of such party which may in any way cause an interrup- tion or a discontinuance of service appertaining to the Sewage Disposal System or to any Sewer System. Section 706. Nonassignabilfty. No party to this Agreement may assign any interest therein to any Person without the consent of the other party hereto at that time, and the terms of this Agreement shall inure to the benefit of and be binding upon the respective representatives and successors of each party hereto. Nothing herein contained, however, shall be construed as preventing the reorganization of any party hereto nor as preventing any other body corporate and politic succeeding to the rights, privileges, powers, immunities, liabilities, disabilities, and duties of a party hereto, as may be authorized by law, in the absence of any prejudi- cial impairment of any obligation of contract hereby imposed. Section 707. Amendments. · Subject to the rights and privileges of the holder or holders of any bonds or other securities of the District, this Agreement may be amended from time to time by written agreement, duly authorized and signed by representatives of the parties hereto. If, at any time, the Service Contract is amended by the parties thereto, such an amendment, if appl i cab 1 e, shall apply as an amendment to this Agreement. It being the intent that if the Service Contract is amended in any way which conflicts with this Agreement, the amendment to the Service Contract shall control and be considered as an amendment to this Agreement • -34- • I • • • ' (( • • • • Section 708. Severability. If any section, subsection, para- graph, clause, phrase, or other provision of this Agreement shall for any reason be held to be invalid or unenforceable, the invalidity or unen- forceabil ity of such section, subsection, paragraph, clause, phrase, or other provision shall not affect any of the remaining provisions of this provision. · Section 709. Waiver. No waiver by either party of any term or condition of this Agreement shall be deemed or construed as a waiver of any other term or condition, nor shall a waiver of any breach be deemed to constitute a waiver of any subsequent breach, whether of the same or of a different provision of this Agreement. Section 710. Remedies. In addition to the remedies provided by law, this Agreement shall be specifically enforceable by the parties hereto. Section 711. Entirety. This Agreement merges and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations, and agreements between the parties hereto relating to the subject matter hereof and constitutes the entire contract between the parties concerning the di sposa 1 of sewage by the Special Connector and the acceptance of such sewage for disposal by the District. Section 112. Ml!llbership in the District. Nothing in this Agreement shall be interpreted so as to give or entitle the Special Con- nector to the status of a Connecting or Associate Member as defined in the Service Contract. The Special Connector acknowledges that it is not entitled to nor will it have representation on the Board of Directors of the District. MTlCLE VIII SPECIAL PROVISI ONS Section 801. Service Area of Special Connector. Upon execution of this Agreement, the Special Connector sha ll furnish to the District, in a form agreeable to the District, a l ega l description and a map of the area served by the Special Connector. Annua l ly thereafter, the Special Connector shall update such legal descri pt i on and a map. Section 802. Exclusion of Territory. Should the governing body of the Spec i al Connector determine that the Spec i al Connector or any por- t i on of the service area thereof be excluded from service by the Distr i ct, any request for such exclus i on shal l be in accordance with the Act and in particular Section 32-4-515, C.R.S. 1973, as amended. Section SOJ. User Charge Systl!ll. The Special Connector shall have a User Charge System based upon actual use of the Sewer System of the Special Connector as required by Title 42, Part 35 of the Code of Federal Regulations currently in effect and as from time to time amended, and in particular Section 35.929 thereof, or an ad valorem tax which meets the requirements of Section 35.~29-1 of said Title. -35- • I • • - • • • • • Sec tion 804. P~nt of Esti•ted Annual Charges . For calenda r year 1984, the District's total esti•ted annual charges to the Special Connector, City of Englewood, shall .be $8,746, payable as provided fn Sec- tion 604 and subject to final adjustllent as provided fn Sections 605 through 609. The Special Connector hereby wafves notfce of publ f c hear i ng on the District's 1984 budget as provided in Section 501 (B). Section 805. Sewr Connecti~ Charges. For new or a 1 tered sewer connections ude after January 1, 1984, the Metro District will credit the Special Connector $500 per single fa•ily residential equivalent unit for each connection for which Denver pays the Metro District $500 per single fa•ily residential equivalent. For each unit for whfch th f s credft fs applied, the Special Connector shall pay to the Metro Dfs trfct the additional a.ount due to the Distri c t based on the sewer connection charge in effect at the tf• of the physical connection to the sewer system served by the Metro District. Section 806. Lillitation on service by the District. Th e Of s- trict shall provide sewage tranghsion and treatllent service only for those areas of the Special Connector, Cfty of Englewood, shown on the attached up and referred to in Exhibit A. Sfnce the sewage treatment facilities of the Special Connector do not serve these areas, that portion of Section 303 pertaining to service by the Special Connector outside fts corporate boundaries and to enlargement of the Special Connector, to wit: The Special Connector may only provide sewer service outside its corporate limits or boundaries to the extent it has the prior approval of the district. Prior to annexation or enlarging of its boundaries by the Special Connector, the Special Connector shall obtain the approval of the District for such annexation or enlargement. The District , through its Board, may disapprove such annexation or enlargement if it. determines that the Special Connector cannot feasibly be served through the District's fac i l i ties and all of Sections 304 and 305 do not apply to this Agreement. Attest: Gary R . H~g b ee , e x off ~c ~o City Clerk-Treasurer At t est: Se cretary CITY OF ENGLEWOOD Eug ene L. Ot~s, Mayor METROPOLITAN DENVER SEWAGE DISPOSAL DISTRICT NO. 1 By ------------------~~-------Cha~rman -36 - • I • I • • • • METROPOLITAN DENVER SEWAGE DISPOSAL DISTRICT NO. 1 EXHIBIT A LIST OF INITIAL CONNECTING, METERING, AND SAMPLING POINTS Special Connector City of Englewood, Colorado Location of Connection Points* Manholes on E. Yale Ave. at: 1. Alley between s. Logan St. and S. Pennsylvania St. z. s. Pearl St. 3. 60 feet west of S. washington St. 4. 10 feet west of S. Clark son St. 5. s. Emerson St. 6. s. Ogden St. 7. 250 feet west of S. Downing St. Individual Service Connection Points -Serving addresses shown on Addendum B attached Method of Measuretaent** Estimating Estimating Estimating Estimating Estimating Estimating Estimating Estimating . \ :•:,. ' . , ... .. ' .. *Nothing herein contained shall be construed as preventing the District and any Special Connector from mutually agreeing upon the relocation of any connecting, metering, and sampling point appertaining hereto. **The District may, at its discretion, change the method of measurement • • I . - • • , • • • • METROPOLITAN DENVER SEWAGE DISPOSAL DISTRICT NO. 1 2120 West Baker Avenue 2155 West Baker Avenue 2167 west Baker Avenue 2200 West Baker Avenue 2396 West Baker Avenue 1997 West Iliff Avenue ADDENDUM B CITY OF ENGLEWOOD 2250 South Tejon Street -industrial 2315 South Tejon Street 1990 West Baltic Place 2200-2280 South Raritan -industrial 3095 South University - a church • •,' .. ' . . . I . • - ' • ' • • • • 7 BY AUTHORITY ORDINANCE NO. SERIES OF 1984 !cP. COUOCIL BILL NO. 6 INTRODUCED BY COUOCIL MEMBER NEAL AN ORDINANCE APPROVING AN AGREEMENI' WITH OIERRY HILLS FIRE PROTEX:TION OisrRICT PROVIDING FOR MUTUAL/A~TIC AID FOR FIRE PROTEX:TION FOR BOTH ENTITIES. WHEREAS, assistance from other fire protection agencies provides a higher level of protection for the City of Englewood; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUOCIL FOR THE CITY OF F.:NGI.&roOD, COLORADO: section 1. That an agreement entitled "l't.ltual Aid/Automatic Aid Agreement (Fire) 1984" is hereby approved by the City Council, said Agreement provides as follows: MUTUAL AID/~TIC AID AGREEMENI' (FIRE) 1984 THIS AGREEMENT, made by and between the CITY OF EN>I.DroOO, CX>LORAOO, a municipal corporation, hereinafter called "Englewood," and OiERRY HILLS FIRE PROTEX:TION OisrRICT, hereinafter called "Olerry Hills," WITNESSETH WHEREAS, Englewood is a municipal corporation organized and existing pursuant to Article XX of the Colorado Constitution, its Charter, and Ordinances; its territor ial j ur i sdiction generally is the legal boundaries of the City of Englewood, Colorado; and WHEREAS, Cherry Hills is a fire protection district organized and existing under Part 3, Chapter 32, of 1973 C .R.S.; and WHEREAS, each of the parties hereto maintain equ 1 pnent ; and rgency WHEREAS, emergencies may arise in one or the other of the jurisdictions of the parties resulting in greater demands than the manpower and equipnent of that party can handle; or emergencies of such intensity may occur that they cannot be handled solely by the equipnent of the party in whose jurisdiction the emergency occurs; and WHEREAS, it is to the interest of each of the parties that they may have service of and from the other party to aid and assist 1 I • • • f • • • • them in the purpose of fighting fires or responding to other emergencies; NCM, THEREFORE, IT IS MUI'UAU.Y AGREED by and between the parties as follows: I. MlJI'UAL AID: l. For and in consideration of the pranises of Olerry Hills, hereinafter set forth, Englewood agrees with O'lerry Hills that in the event there are emergencies in the territory served by Cherry Hills which are beyond the control of the fire department of Cherry Hills, whether because of use of their equipment at other places or because of the intensity of the emergency, or otherwise, Englewood agrees, subject to the limitation hereinafter set forth, to aid and assist Olerry Hills by causing and permitting its fire department and its equipment to be used in responding to emergencies in the territorial area of Cherry Hills, and the need for such aid and assistance shall be determined by the fire department of Cherry Hi lls, subject, however, the the following limitat i ons: Englewood shall be excused fran making its equipment and services available to Cherry Hills i n the event of the need of the emergency equipment and the manpower within the territorial area of Englewood, or their prior use at any place, which decision of availability shall be made by the fire department of Englewood, and which decision shall be conclusive. 2. For and in consideration of the pranises of Englewood, hereinafter set f orth , Cherry Hills agrees with Englewood tha t i n the event there a re f ires or other emergencies i n the territory served by Englewood lotl ich are beyond the control of the fire department o f Dlg l ewood, whether because of use of t heir equ i pmen t a t other places or because o f the intensity o f the eme r gency , or otherwise , Cherry Hills agrees , subject to the limitation hereinafter set forth , to aid and assist Englewood by causing and permitting Cherry Hills Fire Department and equipment to be used in responding to emergencies in the territorial area of Englewood , and the need for such aid and assistance shall be determined by the fire department of Englewood , subject, however, to the following limitation: Cherry Hills shall be excused from making its equipment or service available to Englewood in the event of the need of the emergency equipment or need of the manpower within the territorial area of Cherry Hills , or their prior use at any place, which decision of availability shall be made by the fire department of Cherry Hills , and lotlich decision shall be conclusive . 3. 'nle services rendered by one party to the other are of equal value to the services rendered by the other party, and there shall be no charges made by the one party for the services rendered 2 I • - • ' • • • • to the other party, except that in the event of equipment damage by reason of the action of the anployees of the other party, the liability and loss shall be determined on the basis of the fault or negligence of any anployee. If the anployee is determined to be at fault or negligent, the party anploying that anploye shall be liable for the loss. 4. Each party shall be expected to maintain its equipnent and organize its emergency response method with both manpower and equipment to the degree necessary to cope with the ordinary and routine emergencies arising within its boundaries and for which the party is organized. Neither party shall expect the other to respond to emergency calls where the emergency arises due to a failure to organize available manpower or maintain equipment in proper working order and in sufficient quantity to meet the respective danands of the persons and property within each of the parties' respective jurisdictions. II. AUTOMATIC AID: 1. It is understood and agreed that the Englewood Fire Department (pumper units) will respond from Jefferson Station and/or Acoma Station into Cherry Hills Fire Protection District as part of the initial response through automatic dispatching by Englewood dispatchers into the below defined areas. DEFINED AREA -CHERRY HILLS: generally extending east and west from the east city lLmits of Englewood to Little Dry Creek on Franklin Street, north and south from U.S. 285 to East Belleview Avenue (5100 Block) • 2. It is understood and agreed that the Cherry Hills Fire Department will respond from Station 11 into Englewood's district as part of the initial response through automatic dispatching by Englewood dispatchers into the below defined areas. DEFINED AREA -~: generally extending east and west from the east city lLmits to South Logan Street, north and south from Dartmouth Avenue to Tufts Avenue. III. CYI'HER PROVISIONS: l. Either party hereto may terminate this contract without cause upon thirty (30) days' prior written notice to the other. 3 • I • • ,., • ( • • • • IN WITNESS WHERroF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement this __ day of , 1984. Attest: Gary R. Higbee, ex officio City Clerk-Treasurer Attest: Secretary CITY OF EN:;La-JOOO, OX.ORAOO a municipal corporation ~~~-~~~~---&!gene L. ot1s, Mayor CHERRY HILLS FIRE PROTEX:TION DISTRICT ~----~~~-~~ Board President ~--------~~~~-Fue Onef Section 2. The City council of the City of Engewood hereby author1zes the Mayor and ex officio City Clerk-Treasurer to sign and attest the same for and in behalf of the City of t)')glewood. Introduced, read in full, and passed on first reading on the 21st day of February, 1984. Published as a Bill for an Ordinance on the 29th day of February, 1984. Read by title and passed on final reading on the 19th day of March, 1984. 4 • I . • • • • Published by title as Ordinance No. ___ , Series of 1984, on the 21st day of March, 1984. Eugene L. Otls, Mayor Attest: ex off1cio C1ty Clerk-Treasurer I, Gary R. Higbee, ex officio City Clerk-Treasurer of the City of &lglewood, Colorado, hereby certify that the above am foregoing is a true, accurate and canplete copy of the Ordinance passed on final reading am published by title as Ordinance No. ___ , Series of 1984. Gary R. Higbee 5 • I • • - ( • ( • ORDINAOCE NO.A SERIES OF 1984 BY AUTHORITY • • • COUNCIL BILL NO. 6 INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER NEAL AN ORDINAOCE APPROVING AN AGREEMENI' WITH OiERRY HILLS FIRE PROTa::I'ION DISTRICT PROVIDING FOR MUTUAL/AUTCJ1ATIC AID FOR FIRE PROTa::I'ION FOR BOl'H ENTITIES. WHEREAS, assistance from other fire protection agencies provides a higher level of protection for the City of Englewood; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY 'mE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE CITY OF ENGLEl'JOOD, COLORADO: Section 1. That an agreement entitled "M.Jtual Aid/Automatic Aid Agreement (Fire) 1984" is hereby approved by the City Council, said Agreement provides as follows: MUTUAL AID/AUTCJ1ATIC AID AGREEMENT (FIRE) 1984 THIS AGREEMENI', made by and between the CITY OF EN;;LEWOOD, COLORADO, a municipal corporation, hereinafter called "Englewood," and OiERRY HILLS FIRE PROTa::I'ION DISTRICT, hereinafter called "Olerry Hills," WITNESSETH WHEREAS, Englewood is a municipal corporation organized and existing pursuant to Art icle XX of the Colorado Constitution, its Charter, and Ordinances; its territorial jurisdiction generally is the legal boundaries of the City of Englewood, Colorado; and WHEREAS, Cherry Hills is a fire protection district organized and existing under Part 3, Chapter 32, of 1973 C.R.S.; and WHEREAS, each of the parties hereto maintain emergency equipnent; and WHEREAS, emergencies may arise in one or the other of the jurisdictions of the parties resulting in greater demands than the manpower and equipnent of that party can handle; or emergencies of such intensity may occur that they cannot be handled solely by the equipnent of the party in whose jurisdiction the emergency occurs; and WHEREAS, it is to the interest of each of the parties that they may have service of and from the other party to aid and assist 1 I • • ( ( • • • • them in the purpose of fighting fires or responding to other emergencies; N<M, 'rnEREFORE, IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED by and between the parti es as follows: I. MUTUAL AID: 1. For and in consideration of the promises of Cherry Hills, hereinafter set forth, Englewood agrees with Cherry Hills that in the event there are emergencies in the territory served by Cherry Hills which are beyond the control of the fire department of Cherry Hills, whether because of use of their equiJ;lllel'lt at other places or because of the intensity of the emergency, or otherwise, Englewood agrees, subject to the lUnitation hereinafter set forth, to a i d and assist Cherry Hills by causing and permitting its fire department and its equiJ;lllel'lt to be used in responding to emergencies in the territorial area of Cherry Hills, and the need for such aid and assistance shall be determined by the fire department of Cherry Hills, subject, however, the the following limi tat ions: Englewood shall be excused from making its equipnent and services available to Cherry Hills in the event of the need of the emer gency equipment and the manpower within the territorial area o f Englewood, or their prior use at any place, which dec i sion of avai lability shall be made by the fire department of Englewood, and wh ich decision shall be conclusive. 2. For and i n consideration of the promises of Englewood, her einaft e r set f or th , Cherry Hills agrees with Englewood that i n the e vent there a r e f i res or other emergencies in the terr i tory served b y Eng l ewood wh i ch are beyond the control of the fire depar tmen t o f Englewood, whether because of use of their equipment at other places or because of the intensity of the emergency, or other wise , Che rry Hills agrees, subj ect to the lim i t a t i on hereinafter set for th , t o aid and assist Englewood by caus i ng and permitting Cherry Hills Fire Department and equ i pmen t t o be used in responding to emer gencie s i n the terri t or ial area o f Eng lewood , and the need for such aid and assistance shall be determ ined by the fire department of Englewood , subject , however , to the following limitation: Cherry Hills shall be e xcused fr om mak ing its equipment or service available to Englewood in the event of the need of the emergency equipment or need of the manpower within the territorial area of Cherry Hills , or their prior use at any place , which decision of availability shall be made by the fire department of Cherry Hills, and which decision shall be conclusive. 3. The services rendered by one party to the other are of equal value to the services rendered by the other party, and there shall be no charges made by the one party for the services rendered 2 I • ( ( • • • • to the other party, except that in the event of equipment damage by reason of the action of the enployees of the other party, the liability and loss shall be determined on the basis of the fault or negligence of any enployee. If the enployee is determined to be at fault or negligent, the party enploying that enploye shall be liable for the loss. 4. Each party shall be expected to maintain its equipnent and organize its energency response method with both manpower and equipment to the degree necessary to cope with the ordinary and routine emergencies arising within its boundaries and for which the party is organized. Neither party shall expect the other to respond to energency calls where the energency arises due to a failure to organize available manpower or maintain equipment in proper working order and in sufficient quantity to meet the respective denands of the persons and property within each of the parties' respective jurisdictions. II. AUTOMATIC AID: 1. It is understood and agreed that the Englewood Fire Department (pumper units) will respond from Jefferson Station and/or Acoma Station into Cherry Hills Fire Protection District as part of the initial response through automatic dispatching by Englewood dispatchers into the below defined areas. DEFINED ARFA -OiERRY HILLS: generally extending east and west from the east city lUnits of Englewood to Little Dry Creek on Franklin Street, north and south from u.s. 285 to East Belleview Avenue (5100 Block) • 2. It is understood and agreed that the Cherry Hills Fire Department will respond from Station 11 into Englewood's district as part of the initial response through automatic dispatching by Englewood dispatchers into the below defined areas. DEFINED ARFA -EtG.DroOD: generally extending east and west from the east city limits to SOuth Logan Street, north and south from Dartmouth Avenue to Tufts Avenue. III. OTHER PROVISIONS: 1. Either party hereto may terminate this contract without cause upon thirty (30) days' prior written notice to the other. 3 • I . - ( ( • ( • • • • IN WITNESS WHERIDF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement this __ day of , 1984. Attest: Gary R. Higbee, ex officio City Clerk-Treasurer Attest: Secretary CITY OF FXiLDKX:D, COLORAOO a municipal corporation OiERRY HILLS FIRE PROTEX:TION DISTRICT ~--------~~~--~~ Board President ~-----~-~~--Fue Olief Section 2. The City Council of the City of ~ewood hereby authorizes the Mayor and ex officio City Clerk-Treasurer to sign and attest the same for and in behalf of the City of ~lewood. Introduced, read in full, and passed on first reading on the 21st day of February, 1984. Published as a Bill for an Ordinance on the 29th day of February, 1984. Read by title and passed on final reading on the 19th day of March, 1984. 4 • I • • ' • • • • Published by title as Ordinance No .. __ /_~_, the 21st day of March, 1984. Series of 1984, on Eugene L. 0t1s, Mayor Attest: ex officio City Clerk-Treasurer I, Gary R. Higbee, ex officio City Clerk-Treasurer of the City of Englewood, Colorado, hereby certify that the above and foregoing is a true, accurate and canplete copy of the Ordinance passed on final reading and published by title as Ordinance No.___];(_, Series of 1984. Gary R. H1gbee 5 • I • • • • • .. 7C P R 0 C L A M A T I 0 N WHEREAS, all citizens should be made aware of the ever present dangers posed by potentially poisonous housel1oLJ substances; and WHEREAS, our youngsters too often have access to commonly used drugs and medicines and to such potentially toxic household products as polishes, cleaners, lighter fluids, anti-freeze , and paint solvents; and WHEREAS , the informational and educational achievements of many of our State's official and voluntary organizations have been instrumental in awakening individuals to the need for poison pre- vention, including the proper use of child protective puckuging; and WHCREAS , our efforts have substantially reduced the incidents of accidental childhood poisonings and these eff orts must continue; NOW THEREFORE, I, EUGENE L. OTIS, Mayor of the City of Englewood , Colorado, do hereby proclaim March 18-24, 1984 POISON PREVENTION WEEK in this City. Further , I call on all those official and voluntary organizations that have done so much to continue their efforts unti l we can eliminate poisoning as a significant health hazard to o r children . GIVEN nder my hand and seal this 19th day of March, 1984. • I • • ( • • • • 7C P R 0 C L A M A T I 0 N WHEREAS, all citizens should be made aware of the ever present dangers posed by potentially poisonous hous e hold substances; and WHEREAS, our youngsters too often have access to commonly used drugs and m~dicines and to such potentially toxic household products as polishes, cleaners, lighter fluids, anti-freeze, and paint solvents; and WHEREAS , the informational and educational achievements of many of our State's official and voluntary organizations have been instrumental in awakening individuals to the need for poison pre- vention, i ncluding the proper us e of child prot ecti ve p~ck~~in~; and WHCREAS , our e fforts have substantially reduced the incidents of accidental childhood poisonings and these efforts must continue; NOW THEREFORE, I, EUGENE L. OTIS, Mayor of the City of Englewood , Colorado , do hereby proclaim March 18-24, 1984 POISON PREVENTION WEEK in this City. Further, I call on all those official and voluntary organizations t hat have done so much to continue their efforts until we can elimina te poisoning as a significant health hazard to our children . GIVEN und er my hand and seal this 19th day of March, 1984. ~~~-Lfcrlk __ Eu~ne L. Otis , Ma yor • I • • • • • • '1D P R 0 C L A M A T I 0 N WHEREAS, our nation was founded on the ideals of individual equality and equal opportunity foe all; and WHEREAS, the provision of equal opportunity in housing h as become an integral part of these ideals; fair housing opportunity is a right incorporated into our nation's laws under Title VII! of the 1968 Civil Rights Law; and WH ERE AS, fa i r housing is the policy of the City of Engle wo od an d i mple mentation of this policy requires the positive commitment, i n v olvement and support of each of our citizens; and WHERE AS , ba rri ers th a t d im in is h th e ri g h ts a nd l imiL the opt i ons of a n y citizen will ultimately diminish the right s and li mit t he opti ons of a ll; and v/Hl!:HEAS , this a n ni versary of the Fa ir Housing Act g i v e s t he:! c iti z en s o f Englewood, individually and collectively, the occ asi on to r ededica te t h emse l ves to the principle of freedom of choice; to pa r ticipate in e ff orts to e l i min a t e v es t i ges of housin<J u i ,;c:rimi n .~ tion , and guarantee for each c i ti z en th a t fr eedom of cho ice in s el ection of a home; NOW , THEREF ORE , I, EUGENE L. OTIS, Mayor of the City of Engle wo o d , Co lorado , do her eby proclaim APRIL 1 984 FAIR HOUSING MON TH in the City of Englewood , and I encourage al l our ci t i zen s to abide by the letter and spirit of the Fair Ho using La w. GIVEN under my hand and seal the 19th day o f March, 1984. • I • • ( • • • - P R 0 C L A M A T I 0 N WHEREAS, our nation was founded on the ideals of individual equality and equal opportunity for all; and WHEREAS, the provision of equal opportunity in housing has become an integral part of these ideals; fair housing opportunity is a right incorporated into our nation's laws under Title VIII of the 1968 Civil Rights Law; and WHER EAS, fair housing is the policy of the City of Engl e wood and implementation of this policy requires the positive commitment, involvement and support of each of our citizens; and WIIEREAS , barriers that diminish the rights a nd lim it the options of any c i tizen will ultimately diminish the rights and limit the options of al l; and WlfJ;HEAS , this anniversar y of the !"air Housing Act gives the citi ze n s of Englewood, individually and collectively, the occ asi on to rededica te themselves to the principle of freedom of cho ice ; to participate in e ff orts to elimi n ate vestiges of housin<J di,;c:rimin<~ tion , and guaranlee for ea ch citizen that freedom of choic e in selection of a home; NOW , THE REfORE, I, EUGENE L. OTIS, Mayor of the City of Englewo od, Colorado, do hereby proclaim APRIL 1984 FAIR HOUSING MONTH in the City of Englew ood, and I encourage all our citizens to abide by the letter and spirit of the Fai r Housing Law. GIVEN under my hand and seal the 19th day of March, 1984. • I • •